| Author |
Dev log1 |
Starcommander
Marshal
Joined: December 14, 2005
Posts: 579
From: In your base, stealing your cookies
|  Posted: 2010-05-14 03:48
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-14 02:59, Kenny_Naboo wrote:
You mean the layers on the rings? I've counted stations with 10 ring layers... 
Or do you mean the armor slots per side?
But isn't that supposed to be the case?
UGTO always has heavier armor. But it can still be whittled down with coordinated fire. If you've noticed, Kluths still manage to take them down pretty quick with coordinate attacks. Casualties are unavoidable, but it's war.
You have your shields, and you have your armor. Each of them may not be as strong as UGTO's armor, granted, but then you can rotate your shields to compensate.
And IF... hopefully if... Jack does go along with the hull before armor rep... then you guys already have an advantage with the shields.
[ This Message was edited by: Kenny_Naboo on 2010-05-14 03:00 ]
|
|
UGTO has 2 plates of armor PER a side giving them a total of 8 altogether on most of there ships. All of those plats of armor repair AT THE SAME TIME, giving them an incredible regen rate of total armor %. With the missile "bug" now gone, UGTO can just spin like a top in there stations and always have a fresh 2 plats of armor for anyone to shoot at. Kluth has this too but you need it to live at all. ICC has 1 plate and 1 shield per a side, giving and 4 and 4, however one of them doesn't repair and instead is reliant on its own regeneration. Yes it can be rotated into, but you know how fast both factions can eat down 400-500% of shield energy? REALLY FAST! A few QST into the side of a ship and add some particle cannons and those shields drop really quick, no matter the ship getting shot at.
_________________
WH 40k armies, Grey Knights, Dark Angles, Imperial Guard (Vostroyan First Born) and Orks.
There is a thin line between knowing when to give up and when to try harder.
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2010-05-14 04:31
Unfortunately for that, you'll have to wait till Jack decides on a fix.
I don't think we'll see UGTO armor being nerfed... nor ICC armor/shield strength being buffed.
The best you can hope for is a reduction in repair rates for anyone, or an increase in shield recharge rates.
But for the time being, just get in your dreads and pummel one side of the station till it turns red. Get your minelayer dessies into action too. Rush in at full speed, lay TN mines right next to those stations and then detonate them on the way out!
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
Pope
Fleet Admiral
Joined: June 11, 2002
Posts: 2449
From: World of tomorrow
| Posted: 2010-05-14 06:39
I can only recommend not to attempt to employ artificial methods that are tricky to implement, as some have vividly suggested here.
I'm confident that the repair rate issue can be fixed by playing with numbers.
This means: Tweaking the balance between the damage capacity of devices (an often overlooked feature that would deserve more attention!), hull, and shielding (armor shields etc.)
In that context, the side-effect of the AHR being a fix device damage free card and other things (easy device damage to shields when the are down as a measure of balancing a higher refill rate on shields...?) should also be looked at.
I always saw the high amount of "hull" damage ships took in comparison with armor and device damage as an odd peculiarity in DS. What is this mysterious hull that is not armor or devices? Ship superstructure? If your superstructure gets shot up, you're already IN VERY BIG trouble.
Some re-thinking of the damage system might be good. I realize this is a Two Weeks Topic, but hey. Think about it, even if a jerk brought it up =D
tl;dr: Don't freck around; Up armor/shield capacity. Up device hitpoints (device damage produces pres as hull, right?). Nerf hull. Increase significance of device damage (i.e. damage before 50%). Nerf drone-based armor repair. Nerf AHR when done to get in line with new realities.
_________________
|
DiepLuc
Chief Marshal
Joined: March 23, 2010
Posts: 1187
| Posted: 2010-05-14 07:51
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-13 20:05, BackSlash wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-13 13:54, Pakhos wrote:
So the list :
1-Make ugto armor repair rate slower.
2-Make ad more stronger than hlc.(we must be the most agresive right?)
3-Lower the eccm effectiveness. (cruiser dont want to have 90+ signal nor dessies 60+)
4- Reduce psi range to 650gu.
|
|
1) Will look at it.
2) It is stronger.
3) I agree, although trying to impliment a fix is tricky.
4) Done.
|
|
1/ If UGTO armor repair rate slower, then Kluth SI should be weaker, basically.
When I'm playing Kluth, I don't understand about the AM torps on Mandi. Comparsion AM torps and SI:
AM: slower, weaker, recharge longer, short range.
SI: opposite to AM.
Logically, the more powerful the weapon is, the slower it is. Then I suggest exchange the speed of core wep (all factions) to torp (all factions): firing speed and recharge time. All other measure unchange.
At this moment, it's hard to deal with a krill staying 600 gu away from you and instantly kill you with all its SI hit. No EAD or AD can do such thing. Then it will make many Kluth GA impose on Krill to kill many small ships, as one will uncloak, kill and cloak, result that kills number higher than ICC and UGTO players and killed number lower than ICC and UGTO players. In facts, the ranking list already proves that. While ICC and UGTO is encouraged to use smaller ship rather than EAD or AD, the Kluth keeps counting on Krill power.
4/ The faction wep range should be modified considered on the definiton of length. To me, short range <= 350 <= medium range <= 700 <= long range, +- 50gu approximately.
_________________
|
Nimitz
Fleet Admiral
Courageous Elite Commandos
Joined: April 19, 2005
Posts: 141
From: Melbourne, Australia
| Posted: 2010-05-14 09:36
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-13 09:31, BackSlash wrote:
I think his beef is the fact that K'luth aren't designed to do that at range, of which they're not.
|
|
Correct! I'd accept that from ICC but not Kluth.
_________________
\"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning.\" -- Rich Cook
|
Nimitz
Fleet Admiral
Courageous Elite Commandos
Joined: April 19, 2005
Posts: 141
From: Melbourne, Australia
| Posted: 2010-05-14 09:39
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-13 10:25, Kenny_Naboo wrote:
How about breaking orbit, stop hugging that rock, and go get him......??
|
|
I did exactly that on two occasions that he appeared. However, being kluth, Lith just cloaked and melted away after I alpha'ed him a few times.
_________________
\"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning.\" -- Rich Cook
|
Novacat
Grand Admiral
Joined: October 30, 2001
Posts: 2337
From: Starleague Cache
| Posted: 2010-05-14 09:44
Based on what I have read, depot regeneration should not be as huge a factor in combat as it is currently, as it is both fustrating to be unloading multiple salvos of weapons on a target, only to see its HP actually going up. At the same time, it is bad balance. For example, the developers originally planned for shields to have high regeneration, with a downside of energy costs, and armor to have low to nonexistant regeneration, with an upside of not requiring much energy. However, the truth is that UGTO Armor currently repairs much better than ICC shields, because UGTO armor is affected by Depots and ICC Shields are not, which seriously skews the balance.
However, someone did tell me that if HP Regeneration was not in, than it would be very easy to pop a ship. The solution there seems to be easy: Increase the maximum HP of the ships in question. Having HP as opposed to Regeneration make up the durability of the ship works best, as it allows a player to jump into a battle, fight for some time, gives him enough time to retreat if damaged, and is temporarily taken out of the battle for a significant amount of time while he repairs. This rewards an opposing side for damaging a ship, and leads to a lot less fustration as a result of hard to balance regeneration mechanics.
At the same time, though, I also think Stations should be re-designed so they are less cheesy while retaining their usefulness.
[ This Message was edited by: Leopard on 2010-05-14 09:47 ]
_________________
Ghostly Specter of an Ancient Past.
|
Nimitz
Fleet Admiral
Courageous Elite Commandos
Joined: April 19, 2005
Posts: 141
From: Melbourne, Australia
| Posted: 2010-05-14 09:51
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-13 21:19, Azreal wrote:
UGTO Dreads take a while to rep. Not sure on stations. Dont really use em.
I dont like the idea of slowing down combat. Its slow enough and people stay parked at the planet half the time as it is. The one faction that can safely do that due to cloak technology seems to be the only fleet who actually USES platforms intelligently. As it is, this "new" no-honor community jumps repping ships immediately on site even at planets and kill them now. Slow down rep rates or add some limit to supplying and you will only make that entire process worse.
When this happens people rightfully log out and say screw MV. I dont see how this concept will enhance COMBAT.
|
|
Agreed, UGTO dreads and stations take a while to repair already, slowing down the repairs even more will just make things worse!
I won't mind if there's a limit on the number of drones per ship during combat, but then how is combat determined? If it'll be like how the blockade works right now, then forget about it. A small scout floating about could wreck the already slow repair process.
Also agree on the "no-honour" jumping to enemy planets to kill repping ships (or worse, blockading said planet for a long time while not killing anything - just a big annoyance).
Make hull repairs faster while in non-combat mode, add some sort of shield-repair for ICC (again in non-combat mode or limited during combat) and there should be a lot more combat rather than planet hugging!
[ This Message was edited by: Nimitz on 2010-05-14 09:56 ]
_________________
\"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning.\" -- Rich Cook
|
Novacat
Grand Admiral
Joined: October 30, 2001
Posts: 2337
From: Starleague Cache
| Posted: 2010-05-14 10:37
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-14 09:51, Nimitz wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-13 21:19, Azreal wrote:
UGTO Dreads take a while to rep. Not sure on stations. Dont really use em.
I dont like the idea of slowing down combat. Its slow enough and people stay parked at the planet half the time as it is. The one faction that can safely do that due to cloak technology seems to be the only fleet who actually USES platforms intelligently. As it is, this "new" no-honor community jumps repping ships immediately on site even at planets and kill them now. Slow down rep rates or add some limit to supplying and you will only make that entire process worse.
When this happens people rightfully log out and say screw MV. I dont see how this concept will enhance COMBAT.
|
|
Agreed, UGTO dreads and stations take a while to repair already, slowing down the repairs even more will just make things worse!
I won't mind if there's a limit on the number of drones per ship during combat, but then how is combat determined? If it'll be like how the blockade works right now, then forget about it. A small scout floating about could wreck the already slow repair process.
Also agree on the "no-honour" jumping to enemy planets to kill repping ships (or worse, blockading said planet for a long time while not killing anything - just a big annoyance).
Make hull repairs faster while in non-combat mode, add some sort of shield-repair for ICC (again in non-combat mode or limited during combat) and there should be a lot more combat rather than planet hugging!
[ This Message was edited by: Nimitz on 2010-05-14 09:56 ]
|
|
Actually, the problem of planet-hugging comes from the fact that depots and supply ships have too great an effect on gameplay. The defending side always has a massive advantage because of the fact that planets usually have a ton of depots, or depot platforms. Most of the durability of modern Darkspace's ships come from depots, and because of this people will generally cluster in areas where depots are, like Stations and planets.
ICC is currently 'screwed' because they do not benefit as much from this supply depot-centric gameplay, their shields are not replenished by repair drones. But rather than buffing shields or nerfing armor, maybe the solution is to move the game away from the current supply depot centric gameplay.
As far as determining combat, that is easy: If the ship is being hit, it is in combat. It has to remain out of combat in X number of seconds (or minutes) before the non-combat repair kicks in. This way, a scout hovering away at 1000 GU will not impact repair rates, but a scout getting close enough to shoot at you would, and it would make sense for this to be the case.
[ This Message was edited by: Leopard on 2010-05-14 10:44 ]
_________________
Ghostly Specter of an Ancient Past.
|
Pakhos[+R]
Chief Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: May 31, 2002
Posts: 1352
From: Clean room lab
| Posted: 2010-05-14 12:27
Killing a ship in repair has nothing to do with honor. But has something to do with stupidism if you are clever enough to bring a 5% ship to battle zone to be repaired.
Nobody wants to slow down the combat. But you must admit as ugto. You guys love to hug those planets because your asses are covered by depots and you are having high % of winning the battle. Personaly I wouldnt slow down repair progress by tweaking the depots/drone ability.
My idea is simple. A planet cant have more than 3 depots. As their is a limit how many platform you may build in system , same code can be applied for how many supply platforms can be built between those 30 platform limit. Like you are allowed to build 10/10/10 between platforms.
Those would mean you will have to pull a supply ship to repair something and means more prestige for anyone. I dont think it is bad idea.
_________________
* Josef hands [PB]Quantium the Golden GothThug award for best melodrama in a miniseries...
[-GTN-]BackSlash: "Azreal is a master of showing me what is horribly broken in the game."
|
Novacat
Grand Admiral
Joined: October 30, 2001
Posts: 2337
From: Starleague Cache
| Posted: 2010-05-14 17:25
Three depots and 10 supply platforms is an awful lot... you sure it would actually stem the problem? Not to mention it would impact legitimate repariing as well.
As I said, the best solution is to nerf combat repair rates. This way, getting quickly repaired out of combat is not impaired, but camping a planet's repair drones wont really hurt you.
However, I think the out of combat repair penalty should only apply to armor and hull repair. System repair should be completely unaffected.
[ This Message was edited by: Leopard on 2010-05-14 17:31 ]
_________________
Ghostly Specter of an Ancient Past.
|
Pakhos[+R]
Chief Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: May 31, 2002
Posts: 1352
From: Clean room lab
| Posted: 2010-05-14 17:29
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-14 17:25, Leopard wrote:
Three depots and 10 supply platforms is an awful lot... you sure it would actually stem the problem?
|
|
Try 8 depots with 15 platforms.
_________________
* Josef hands [PB]Quantium the Golden GothThug award for best melodrama in a miniseries...
[-GTN-]BackSlash: "Azreal is a master of showing me what is horribly broken in the game."
|
Sixkiller
Marshal
Courageous Elite Commandos
Joined: May 11, 2005
Posts: 1786
From: Netherlands
| Posted: 2010-05-14 17:51
I like the mentioned in-combat repair rate and out-of-combat repair rate. It would defenitly help, and provide tools for the devs to alter things.
Say supplies/depots/plats give a boost in combat, but a bigger boost out of combat.
_________________
|
Novacat
Grand Admiral
Joined: October 30, 2001
Posts: 2337
From: Starleague Cache
| Posted: 2010-05-14 18:12
The problem I have with your suggestion is that it does nothing to solve the core problem, just tries covering it up a little by nerfing the number of depots/supply plats. The problem would still exist though, you would just have entire fleets camping around 3 depots and 10 supply platforms instead.
Nevermind it does absolutly nothing to the infamous UGTO Support Station fleets, whom mainly rely on their own reload drones. 10 UGTO Support stations have 30 Reload drones between them. How is your suggestion going to balance that?
[ This Message was edited by: Leopard on 2010-05-14 18:15 ]
_________________
Ghostly Specter of an Ancient Past.
|
Starcommander
Marshal
Joined: December 14, 2005
Posts: 579
From: In your base, stealing your cookies
| Posted: 2010-05-14 20:04
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-14 18:12, Leopard wrote:
The problem I have with your suggestion is that it does nothing to solve the core problem, just tries covering it up a little by nerfing the number of depots/supply plats. The problem would still exist though, you would just have entire fleets camping around 3 depots and 10 supply platforms instead.
Nevermind it does absolutly nothing to the infamous UGTO Support Station fleets, whom mainly rely on their own reload drones. 10 UGTO Support stations have 30 Reload drones between them. How is your suggestion going to balance that?
[ This Message was edited by: Leopard on 2010-05-14 18:15 ]
|
|
we said IN combat and OUT of combat repair rates. IN combat ships only can be repaired by there own drones and the drones of another ship. OUT of combat the restriction is lifted. This dose solve the Support Station spam that UGTO is so fond of. By making it easier to kill said stations and giving them the same vulnerability that ICC and Kluth share in there own stations.
_________________
WH 40k armies, Grey Knights, Dark Angles, Imperial Guard (Vostroyan First Born) and Orks.
There is a thin line between knowing when to give up and when to try harder.
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
