PCore007

Discussion / Announcement area for PCore development.
zombywoof
Posts: 6523
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 4:59 am
Location: Over the Rainbow

Post by zombywoof »

Win98SE wrote:QUOTE (Win98SE @ Nov 25 2014, 09:27 AM) Finally there is the rest of the 150 people on leaderboard, who don't appear to care. Maybe they don't care at all, buffs or nerfs.
Dude. Just stop. Go take Cadet and ACS and a sociology course from your local community college and maybe a stats course as well. Then try to buy some common sense from the elbow grease store and THEN come back and have this conversation.

QUOTE I stand by what I said about Hunt2 and Sniper1, it is not that easy to defend with.[/quote]
You must be bad at this game. Just last night we had people defend against an uneyed bomb run on our tac just fine with sniper1 sfs. As TF so we didn't even have the hunter2 option.

My team also wasn't Sheff, Drizz, Culm, Vogue, and some other hypervet. It was Sentinel, Wild, HyperVoob, and a couple of other randoms. So my only conclusion is that you're wrong and quite possibly terrible at this game.


QUOTE OK, yes I do know the Missile Damage GA, with Ship Speed, got moved to TAC. Sup got Missile Tracking and Scan Range. Exp got: pulse probe moved to tier2, with its 5k scan range. That's right, pulse probe was moved to tier2 for exp, giving exp a direct counter to TAC. I know it was move to treasures and it's range was reduced to 3k recently. Still, most of this was like well over a year ago. Now 6 people have a problem. Well........I guess now is as good a time as any, but I don't see a big community concern for it, I see 6 people.......[/quote]
Ok but seriously. Look at the thread title for the most recent Xexy vs Element game. There was continuous complaining about hunter3 during the entire game by everyone on Xexy. Just because they didn't post here doesn't mean they don't care. Like christ almighty.

And look, this was all done a year ago. In fact, a lot was done a year (or more) ago: first, pulseprobes were very heavily nerfed. Scouts don't carry PPs anymore. Second, tac got massive buffs. First, ship speed GA (by far the most powerful GA) was moved to tac. Missile Damage was also moved to Tac. During this timeframe Tac was considered severely underpowered.

So then time passes and people start warming up to using tac again and it feels great except for one thing: it's absolutely no fun to play against tac. The reason for this is because hunt3 is such a piece of cheesetech and a skillless hole that only people with no skill at all could ever hope to enjoy using it. Also because finding adv sfs with sig3 is pretty much impossible whether or not they have energy left for their cloak.

QUOTE I think Weedman did move Missile Damage to Tac specifically to help Tac defend. But it adds, 10% extra damage at tier2?[/quote]
You know there should be a rule that before you even begin commenting on core balance you should know something about the game.

Every single GA except for Speed (which was recently changed) is 10% at each level. That means it adds 21% extra damage at tier2. If you'd like the math it's as follows:

1.1 * 1.1 = 1.21

Jimminy $#@!ing crickets I don't ask for much just that you download ICE and actually look at the numbers involved before you blither on about things. Or pay attention and realize that when good and established vets think Tac is overpowered it kind of doesn't matter what the rest of the community thinks. I know that seems like a strange concept but figure it like this: you can't d in an sf with hunter2 and sniper 1. Therefore to you, tac isn't op. But people like myself can d in sfs with sniper 1 almost more efficiently and effectively than with any other non-prox-mine tool. Your incompetence has no bearing on whether or not tac is overpowered because your incompetence is your incompetence. The problem with tac is that when you reach a certain tier of competence (like, say, knowing not to mount hunters in sf vs sf battles) it's effectively unstoppable at the adv tier.

And then you blither on about hunt2 and sniper1 when the problem everyone has is with hunt3 and sig3 which really just makes me wonder if you've ever bothered reading the thread.

QUOTE As for con pushes, the con needs an escort, the stealth fighters need to use util to kill the con and that will get them eyed by the con, so the defenders can pick them off. Also the scouts have to die. If this is done with a bomb run, it can be effective. Maybe not in every situation, but it does work, especially with counter3 heavy bombers and avd scouts.[/quote]
What the $#@!. Do you actually think about what you post before you post?

Util 2 outdamages Nan2 by a fairly large margin. If I were at home I'd be able to tell you exactly how much. If you get as many people to attack the con as are defending it and all those people do is just fire util2 into the stupid con as soon as they're in range, they will kill that con 90% of the time.

If you do it at the same time as a bomb run things get even more messy. One SF is better suited to solo the con than any other ship in the game. One util2 sf kills the con while the other 4 sniper off the nans of the bbr and then sniper down the bbr completely ignoring any ints on D.

As for counter3 heavy bombers and adv/hvy scouts, now you're talking about tier 3 tech being used to defeat tier 2 tech.

QUOTE I can see people having issues with the way tac works. It can be frustrating to deal with. But there is a reason most pub commanders don't go full tac first. Because it will be bombed, and the bomb run often will work. I did not see many people going full tac during the recent squad tournament either. I think there is a reason for that as well.[/quote]
Get on Friday. You vs me. I will go straight tac every single game and you can pick whichever faction you want to bomb me with. Bios is probably your best bet, by the way.


QUOTE The question whether it is overpowered or not, well, that answer is mostly just an opinion, and nothing more. I would kind of prefer a general poll.[/quote]
I don't think you understand: the opinion of terminally incompetent people doesn't matter.

QUOTE Well, it's not like tac will be nerfed out of the game. If need be changes can be reverted anyway. I will support whatever P32 decides to do. (Oh, can you buff Vangs please. Might as well ask while we are talking about balance changes. Lol.)[/quote]
If you paid attention to anything that was said in this thread, no one's talking about nerfing them out of the game. We're suggesting a 10% damage nerf to hunter3 and a change to the way sig3 and adv sfs work. None of this has anything to do with hunter2 sfs.

As for Vanguards, I've already talked to P32 and I'm going to present him with a rework of the Phoenix faction because that faction is the $#@!ing worst piece of @#(! ever designed.
Image
Don't find fault, find a remedy; anybody can complain.
Cookie Monster wrote:QUOTE (Cookie Monster @ Apr 1 2009, 09:35 PM) But I don't read the forums I only post.
zombywoof
Posts: 6523
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 4:59 am
Location: Over the Rainbow

Post by zombywoof »

Also I know I've been upset and angry in this thread. I apologize. Game design is something I take very seriously and it's very frustrating for me to feel like I need to keep repeating my points.

As an olive branch, Win, if you'd like tomorrow I have the day off from work and will be getting knee deep in ICE to look at what I want to present to Phantom032 with regards to how to change Phoenix so it doesn't suck. If you like I can sit in the lobby with you and explain to you how this design stuff works.
Image
Don't find fault, find a remedy; anybody can complain.
Cookie Monster wrote:QUOTE (Cookie Monster @ Apr 1 2009, 09:35 PM) But I don't read the forums I only post.
Malicious Wraith
Posts: 3170
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 12:51 am

Post by Malicious Wraith »

I would enjoy seeing hvy scout mini-ac turrets being brought back (and rix hvy scouts main weapon being switched over to a Gatt.)

This might stop the ridiculousness of rix hvy scouts, and allow me to let newbs fly on my turret and learn, while having the fun of being able to shoot @#(!.

It will also help provide a somewhat capable tac counter as well. :thumbsup:
Unknown wrote:[Just want] to play some games before Alleg dies for good.
I don't want that time to be a @#(!-storm of hate and schadenfreude.
IG: Liquid_Mamba / Fedman
cashto
Posts: 3165
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 5:40 am
Location: Seattle

Post by cashto »

phoenix1 wrote:QUOTE (phoenix1 @ Nov 25 2014, 10:26 AM) Also I know I've been upset and angry in this thread. I apologize. Game design is something I take very seriously and it's very frustrating for me to feel like I need to keep repeating my points.
I was about to break my silence in this thread here. I get that you're frustrated, but please tone down the personal attacks. You can make your point without the vitriol.
phoenix1 wrote:QUOTE (phoenix1 @ Nov 25 2014, 10:18 AM) You must be bad at this game. Just last night we had people defend against an uneyed bomb run on our tac just fine with sniper1 sfs. As TF so we didn't even have the hunter2 option.

My team also wasn't Sheff, Drizz, Culm, Vogue, and some other hypervet. It was Sentinel, Wild, HyperVoob, and a couple of other randoms. So my only conclusion is that you're wrong and quite possibly terrible at this game.
To be fair though, that lineup was much better than what I had. I had two SFs escorting me. One got confused and wandered off to the wrong sector; the other had hunter2 up while dogfighting, so he got podded almost immediately and from there on out you had 3k to whittle away at the nans unmolested.
Globemaster_III wrote:QUOTE (Globemaster_III @ Jan 11 2018, 11:27 PM) as you know i think very little of cashto, cashto alway a flying low pilot, he alway flying a trainer airplane and he rented
zombywoof
Posts: 6523
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 4:59 am
Location: Over the Rainbow

Post by zombywoof »

cashto wrote:QUOTE (cashto @ Nov 25 2014, 10:41 AM) I was about to break my silence in this thread here. I get that you're frustrated, but please tone down the personal attacks. You can make your point without the vitriol.
The problem is I don't think I can make my point without vitriol because I've said the same thing three times without vitriol and people still don't seem to understand the point at all. Here:
phoenix1 wrote:QUOTE (phoenix1 @ Nov 14 2014, 11:05 PM) The problem is that Tac's "counter" is bombing, right? But if for whatever reason you didn't win the opening con wars it's hard to get your bbrs into a position to actually threaten the tac. Your opponent then gets to see you walking if they're in anyway competent (because SFs have good sig) and lob hunters at you from beyond the range of your AC... if your scouts even look in the right direction. Pushing the con is rough too because of how good sfs are against util hull things.
phoenix1 wrote:QUOTE (phoenix1 @ Nov 16 2014, 09:17 PM) Hunters are a huge problem right now, especially hunter 3. There's just no counterplay to them unless you're also tac. The thing is, cross-naning doesn't do anything because a single hunter 3 will deal more damage (with or without missile damage GA) to kill a scout if I'm remembering correctly. I'll do some more number crunching, but basically this means that cross nanning does nothing to stop tac from defending against bomb runs and basically means that there's little to no counterplay against tac by anyone except tac.
phoenix1 wrote:QUOTE (phoenix1 @ Nov 17 2014, 03:20 PM) I may have misrepresented my issues with hunter.

Hunters suck because there's no counterplay. If someone gets a missile lock on you there is nothing you can do beyond pressing the spacebar and hoping the beeping stops. Especially with hunter 3, because it deals so much damage that you can't even crossnan out of it because if your shields are down, even if you are at full health, you die.

The commonality between the hunter problem and the general tac problem is that neither allows room for counterplay. Even fixing adv tech sig stuff won't change the fact that hunter 2 (with GAs) and hunter 3 (with or without GAs) is unfun bull@#(! to play with or against. There's no skill being tested, it's just... did I get lock? Did the chaff fail to make it miss? Weeee I win. When you get into SF vs SF battles, sure, it becomes skill testing... but the skill tested there is "was I dumb enough to mount missiles?"

Compare it to, say, Quickfires. Quickfires are skill testing because they reward you for watching your target's chaff and seeing when it's gone. They also aren't game-changing when they land, they offer a fair amount of damage that helps fighters overcome the damage difference between minigun and gat. Also they're not always the best choice: sometimes you want dumbfires (con attack, some forms of bbr defense, miner attack) instead.

Except with sfs and hunters, you always want hunters except for the corner cases where you use killer, there's no skill in right clicking when you get lock, they completely change the way the fight goes if they hit because they deal so much damage, and there's no reliable way to avoid them.

Quite frankly hunters need a damage nerf... or scouts need an HP perk. Personally I'm in favor of giving scouts a slight bump in HP because the harder a scout is to kill the more teamwork is required when on miner offense or bbr defense.
In response to "improve counter 2/3":
phoenix1 wrote:QUOTE (phoenix1 @ Nov 17 2014, 05:53 PM) Did I leave out the part where this doesn't do anything, or are you trolling me? I can't remember.
phoenix1 wrote:QUOTE (phoenix1 @ Nov 17 2014, 08:31 PM) No none of that matters. The problem is that once the hunter is launched there is no counterplay. There is no dodging. There is no cross nanning. There is just "did the chaff work" or death.
phoenix1 wrote:QUOTE (phoenix1 @ Nov 18 2014, 02:58 PM) Signature of SFs have nothing to do with how @#(!ty hunter3 is right now from a design standpoint. SFs could have eight billion sig and scout survival will still be a coinflip.
phoenix1 wrote:QUOTE (phoenix1 @ Nov 19 2014, 07:49 AM) Again the problem is it's literally the only part of Allegiance that doesn't have a skill check.

Also it's not so much that any tech becomes superior, it's more that hunter 3 is just no fun to play against and it's barely fun to play with. At least with, say, mini3 heavies vs gat3, qf3 adv figs the figs can get heavy booster and try to do fun things like drop minepacks on the ints.

The vitriol didn't just show up out of nowhere, it showed up because I keep saying the same thing over and over and people just ignore it.
Image
Don't find fault, find a remedy; anybody can complain.
Cookie Monster wrote:QUOTE (Cookie Monster @ Apr 1 2009, 09:35 PM) But I don't read the forums I only post.
vogue
Posts: 1971
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 3:28 am

Post by vogue »

I ask everyone in this thread to come together and tell cash to to go $#@! himself. Voobs who can't perform simple math shouldn't be commenting on the balance of this game.
phoenix1 wrote:QUOTE (phoenix1 @ May 5 2013, 08:35 PM) Vogue is clearly #1 and commanding against him feels like commanding against Spideycw at times... though he lacks that little bit of "I don't care who's on my team or what the factions are, it's going to be a stomp anyways" that Spidey managed to pull off in his heyday.
cashto
Posts: 3165
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 5:40 am
Location: Seattle

Post by cashto »

vogue wrote:QUOTE (vogue @ Nov 25 2014, 10:58 AM) I ask everyone in this thread to come together and tell cash to to go $#@! himself. Voobs who can't perform simple math shouldn't be commenting on the balance of this game.
There you go again, breeding chaos and feasting on the harm you cause others.

You're going to make me cry, and then you're going to be in BIG TROUBLE with Administrator Dome.
Globemaster_III wrote:QUOTE (Globemaster_III @ Jan 11 2018, 11:27 PM) as you know i think very little of cashto, cashto alway a flying low pilot, he alway flying a trainer airplane and he rented
vogue
Posts: 1971
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 3:28 am

Post by vogue »

I don't mind intelligent discussion from any member of the community, but intelligent is the keyword there. When you go spouting off about how tier 2 missle damage only gives 10% extra damage your credibility is effectively gone and you should probably leave well enough alone.

granted phantom is probably smart enough (I think) to sift through the noise himself but no reason to flood these forums with it.
Last edited by vogue on Tue Nov 25, 2014 7:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
phoenix1 wrote:QUOTE (phoenix1 @ May 5 2013, 08:35 PM) Vogue is clearly #1 and commanding against him feels like commanding against Spideycw at times... though he lacks that little bit of "I don't care who's on my team or what the factions are, it's going to be a stomp anyways" that Spidey managed to pull off in his heyday.
Win98SE
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2008 1:25 am

Post by Win98SE »

phoenix1 wrote:QUOTE (phoenix1 @ Nov 25 2014, 12:26 PM) Also I know I've been upset and angry in this thread. I apologize. Game design is something I take very seriously and it's very frustrating for me to feel like I need to keep repeating my points.

As an olive branch, Win, if you'd like tomorrow I have the day off from work and will be getting knee deep in ICE to look at what I want to present to Phantom032 with regards to how to change Phoenix so it doesn't suck. If you like I can sit in the lobby with you and explain to you how this design stuff works.
I will take the olive branch, maybe we can talk on mumble sometime. I have access to ICE as well. I think the crux of the matter is that you think tac needs changing, and I really don't. It could be done, but I just don't see the need. Full tac is not winning squadgames. I am also somewhat leery about balance changes being overdone, Lit2 nerf, Vangs. I do think it is a simple matter of nerfing and buffing.

I do understand your points/opinion on Hunt3 being easy and overpowered, avd sfs being invisible. I just don't exactly agree with it being a problem.

Eh, lets talk on mumble sometime. Or pm.


vogue wrote:QUOTE (vogue @ Nov 25 2014, 01:17 PM) I don't mind intelligent discussion from any member of the community, but intelligent is the keyword there. When you go spouting off about how tier 2 missle damage only gives 10% extra damage your credibility is effectively gone and you should probably leave well enough alone.

granted phantom is probably smart enough (I think) to sift through the noise himself but no reason to flood these forums with it.
Ah, I see the confusion here now. When I said tier2, I meant tier2 enh tech, IE Stealth fighter, sig2, hunt2, missile damage1, speed1. Oops. I am less concerned about tier3 avd tac.
OK, I think I am through here.
Last edited by Win98SE on Tue Nov 25, 2014 7:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
QUOTE Failcomm[/quote]
zombywoof
Posts: 6523
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 4:59 am
Location: Over the Rainbow

Post by zombywoof »

Win98SE wrote:QUOTE (Win98SE @ Nov 25 2014, 11:25 AM) Full tac is not winning squadgames.
By my count Element has beaten both Xexy and Zenith with pure tac. Also the only way Xexy was able to beat Element's tac in the elimination stage was by going adv tac after already getting sup and exp.

So this is just factually incorrect.

In fact, it was my experience in that game in particular which drove me to conclude that tac is currently overpowered because if one person goes tac the other faction almost needs to go tac or have some kind of next-level coordination compared to the first tac team. And the reason that Xexy's tac came out ahead of Element's tac in that game wasn't because of interceptors or figs but rather because Xexy had sig GA, PW/EW Dam GA, Sensor GA, and IC has more hull, energy, and damage than Giga. In other words, our SFs were > their SFs.



QUOTE I am also somewhat leery about balance changes being overdone, Lit2 nerf, Vangs. I do think it is a simple matter of nerfing and buffing.[/quote]
In this case I'm aiming to keep the change as narrow as possible. In the past a lot of the "balance" done by core czars has been in the League of Legends "nuke everything" mindset where you make a series of huge changes and hope for the best. I subscribe to the Blizzard version of balance, which is to say "take the time to work out the smallest possible change." A 10% damage nerf to hunter3 (and ONLY hunter3) seems like the perfect solution here for the following reasons:

1) it doesn't change the ability of sfs to defend against enh tech

2) High KB sf pilots (people with 21+ kb) will still get their 1hko on shieldless scouts

3) Hunter3, by virtue of missile damage GA being in tac, is still more powerful today than it was before Weed moved the MD ga over to tac.

4) It allows for counterplay in the form of cross-nanning bomb runs.

QUOTE I do understand your points/opinion on Hunt3 being easy and overpowered, avd sfs being invisible. I just don't exactly agree with it being a problem.[/quote]
It's a problem when there are no functional answers. And there are no functional answers right now to hunter3 and adv sfs. Counter3 doesn't count because it's a coinflip. It's the same reason we removed random destruction of TP probes.

I'm not sure how you can say "oh there's nothing the pilot can do and it eliminates skill differential" and think "but that's not a problem." Games should be won by the team and commander who are the most skilled. There can be a little variance along the way, like say getting screwed on rocks or having a brainfart moment, that let the underdogs come on top but for the most part the team that flies better deserves to win.

Hunter3 doesn't contribute to that at all.

To be very honest there is a lot about SF play that I adore. I love the stealth mechanics and I love the way snipers work. I prefer gauss for the coolness factor, but snipers are awesome. In fact, in a tac v tac game I don't give a @#(! about hunters because having them equipped is basically like shouting "I REALLY WANT TO GIVE SOMEONE KB." The problem with hunter3 is that it warps matchups between sfs and non sfs. Non-sfs need to get adv garr for counter 3 which basically becomes a game of praying to RNGJesus which isn't fun for anyone.

Again to pull out an analogy: let's say that counter 3 vs hunt 3 had a 50% chance of spoofing the missile, and if you got hit by the missile you die. That might sound well and good and you might think, "oh that's fair." And you'd be right. The problem comes in when you talk about fun.

Let's say you're cruising in your SF and you have to kill some nans on a bomb run. About one time in eight, you're going to miss three missiles in a row. Not because you were bad or did anything wrong, but because that's how the coin flipped. Now because you missed those missiles, let's say the bbr got to live and it blew up your tac. Was that fun? Your skill (or lack of it) had nothing to do with the outcome of that game.

Whatever, things balance out, right? So next game you're in a nan and you're going to bomb a base. Beep beep hunter3 incoming. You press space. Nothing happens you take a missile to the face and die. Next run same thing happens. Final run, same thing happens. Over these 6 scenarios, exactly 50% of the missiles were spoofed... but your life is miserable because a) the missiles never work for you and b) the countermeasures never work for you.

It may seem like this is just some random hypothetical corner case but let's think about it on the flip side. Let's say you get in your interceptor and you have to kill the enemy ints before they blow up your miner. Sheff decides that he needs to kill you and your kb because you're too damn effective, so he starts fighting you. After a pitched aiming battle you come out ahead. You feel great because you just podded Sheff/Weedman/InsertHypervetHere. You went head-to-head with one of the greats and came out on top!

But what if you were in an SF and you fired a missile at him and he just exploded because his countermeasures didn't go off. What satisfaction do you get from that? Did you outplay him? No. You rolled the dice and got lucky.

I mean this goes a little deep into game design theory and can be a bit hard to fathom at first, but it always comes down to making the players feel good about themselves. When you lose, you should feel like you went into the fight and you put up your dukes but got beat. When you win, you should feel like you outplayed someone and beat them. Hunters, especially Hunter3, don't really give that feeling.

Hell, by comparison, snipers. You can trace the sniper fire to where the SF is and spray your bullets there and maybe even kill the SF you can't see. That makes you feel clever for tracing down the sniper fire and killing something you couldn't even see.

Also it might just seem like I'm making this @#(! up but honestly game design is something I've always loved and wanted to do. I read tons of blogs and articles by people like Richard Bartle and Mark Rosewater (I try to read all of his blogs, Magic: The Gathering is the single greatest game design success story of all time) and have many friends who currently work in game design and we share our ideas across each other.
Image
Don't find fault, find a remedy; anybody can complain.
Cookie Monster wrote:QUOTE (Cookie Monster @ Apr 1 2009, 09:35 PM) But I don't read the forums I only post.
Post Reply