| Author |
Dev log1 |
Pakhos[+R]
Chief Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: May 31, 2002
Posts: 1352
From: Clean room lab
|  Posted: 2010-05-14 21:24
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 ]
|
|
It is totaly a different problem .
First of all , i think nobody would assault a planet with 10 stations guarding it unless u have superior force.
2-10 stations cant fight because of 300gu drone range. they have to be so tight to eachother that they will FF.
3- There is no way limiting a player about who to sup , who to not .This cant be even offered as suggestion to avoid 30 sup drones on someone.
4- When they fix planet resource code for spawning ship, 10 stations wont be a problem anymore.
3- 3 depots not much powerfull to repair something quickly. About 10 platforms , well you can always pop them.
Just reminding, today i count total of 17 supply platforms around paul. Had to make a suicide mission to take them out . When resources will be important again to spawn ships, we wont be seeing that much platforms around . Because everytime you will have to pull extractor , then engineer to rebuild them.
_________________
* 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."
|
Nimitz
Fleet Admiral
Courageous Elite Commandos
Joined: April 19, 2005
Posts: 141
From: Melbourne, Australia
| Posted: 2010-05-15 01:22
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-14 21:24, Pakhos wrote:
When resources will be important again to spawn ships, we wont be seeing that much platforms around . Because everytime you will have to pull extractor , then engineer to rebuild them.
|
|
Thus we will be seeing less ships in the MV and even less combat. Pulling ships from your garage should not cost the planet any resources but pulling a new ship from the planet should.
_________________
\"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: 2010-05-15 01:27
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-14 12:27, Pakhos wrote:
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.
|
|
I didn't say the ship being repaired is in the combat zone, I meant far away from it. For example, if the fight was around Paul in R33 and after the battle, the ship is being repaired at Eternity, the enemy comes and surrounds Eternity rather than stay at Paul to cap it (or retreat somewhere else to repair themselves).
Unless of course you consider the entire R33 system to be the combat zone...
_________________
\"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
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2010-05-15 04:50
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-15 01:27, Nimitz wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-14 12:27, Pakhos wrote:
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.
|
|
I didn't say the ship being repaired is in the combat zone, I meant far away from it. For example, if the fight was around Paul in R33 and after the battle, the ship is being repaired at Eternity, the enemy comes and surrounds Eternity rather than stay at Paul to cap it (or retreat somewhere else to repair themselves).
Unless of course you consider the entire R33 system to be the combat zone...
|
|
The honor thing again huh?
It's war. Pls get over that. Otherwise Pearl Harbor wouldn't have happened. As long as there is nothing in the RoC that says you can't attack a 5% respawner at a gate or SY planet, this will go on.
If I see a bunch of supp plats undefended around your planet, I'm going to try to destroy them to deny your faction their use. Is that dishonorable? About as dishonorable as pulling out 5 stations to attack 4 cruisers? About as dishonorable as attacking a 5%er who just spawned at an SY planet?
All moot points aren't they?
Pull some plats out to deep space if you wanna rep in peace.
[ This Message was edited by: Kenny_Naboo on 2010-05-15 04:53 ]
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
ssj4megaman
Grand Admiral
Joined: January 06, 2003
Posts: 54
From: San Diego
| Posted: 2010-05-15 06:13
Definitely, somethings need to be change, and i defninitely agree that alot of the faction ideas are very old and maybe should just be redone from scratch, what each faction is supposed to do....
as for now...
1. ugto armor regen needs to be dropped alot
OR
2a- depot regen needs to be limited in blockaded (active) area's
out of combat they can regen fast or keep stacking....
2b- hull should regen out of combat fast, this will allow people to get back into battles faster.
3. icc shield should recharge alot faster...
SUGGESTION- maybe for icc, drop dmg on their weapons nice amount BUT, leave the range, up the firerate, give them 1 heavy armor all arcs and increase shield regen by 3x the current amount (make it use energy if it has to. if they disable shield so the armor takes the hit at first then use shields, the shields do not recharge while off.
this would make the distinction that they are the defensive faction, they dont out-do ugto or luth in firepower but they can take alot more of a beating.....
I have also been thinking about, how about making battle a bit longer. Increase the hull/armor of every ship in the game by at least 50+%, leave weapon dmg the same, this should allow battles to last a bit longer, and implement the changes for OOC repair, since combat is the mainstay of the game and most people will enjoy.
LUTH
1 thing alot of people do not seem to realize is kluth NEED to work together for our kills, our faction needs alot of players to be effective. most of the time 1 on 1, a luth ship will loose to its counterpart on the other factions (yes we know there are some awesome 1vs1 people out there but out of 50 battles a luth pilot would have to withdraw from battle( cloak and run or reposition) more times than any other faction.
To offset this we need to do pot shots with multiple people to kill effectively. Other faction do no really NEED to do this. So everytime we get a range nerf or any type of nerf etc, it means we need to rely more on others to get that dmg done which makes even more apparent that luth is a faction that requires alot of people to be effective, in combat MORE than the others.
Other races can keep dealing out dmg even when they are about to die, but we still take dmg while cloaking and running away and in that time we are not doing ANY dmg.
_________________
|
Novacat
Grand Admiral
Joined: October 30, 2001
Posts: 2337
From: Starleague Cache
| Posted: 2010-05-15 07:07
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-14 20:04, Starcommand of ICC wrote:
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.
[ This Message was edited by: Leopard on 2010-05-15 07:09 ]
|
|
Read what Pakhos was saying, he was not suggesting any in combat/out of combat repair rates, he was suggesting they hard-limit the number of Depots/Supply platforms, which will not solve anything.
[ This Message was edited by: Leopard on 2010-05-15 07:10 ]
_________________
Ghostly Specter of an Ancient Past.
|
Phoebuzz
Grand Admiral
Joined: November 17, 2003
Posts: 110
| Posted: 2010-05-15 08:17
After consideration, I think the best solution (easy to implement and effective) would be to reduce the speed at which armor gadgets repair by around 3 times.
Reasons:
1. Currently the armor plates are repairing much faster than hull because the hull and each individual armor plate all all individually repair at the same rate. 8x as many armor plates = 8x the number of HPs repaired.
2. Supply tanking always involve the rapid in-combat repair of multiple armor plates by an army of supply drones. The rate at which a ship's multiple armor plates repair from a large number of drones is often enough to completely cancel incoming damage.
3. Out of combat repair is usually limited by hull repair rate, not armor repair rate. A ship with 0% armor and 80% hull will usually be at 100% armor by the time the hull is repaired to 90%. So a flat reduction of armor repair rate should have a limited effect on out of combat (hull) repair rates, while at the same time have a massive effect on in combat (armor) repair rates.
[ This Message was edited by: Phoebuzz on 2010-05-15 08:19 ]
_________________
|
Nimitz
Fleet Admiral
Courageous Elite Commandos
Joined: April 19, 2005
Posts: 141
From: Melbourne, Australia
| Posted: 2010-05-15 08:29
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-15 08:17, Phoebuzz wrote:
After consideration, I think the best solution (easy to implement and effective) would be to reduce the speed at which armor gadgets repair by around 3 times.
|
|
That would put UGTO and Kluth to a disadvantage, unless armour is also removed from ICC ships since the larger ICC ships have both shields and armour.
Not sure what you're trying to achive by lowering the armour repair rate, unless you also plan to increase hull repair rate. Otherwise, there will be even less combat in the MV.
_________________
\"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: 2010-05-15 09:44
Quote:
|
That would put UGTO and Kluth to a disadvantage, unless armour is also removed from ICC ships since the larger ICC ships have both shields and armour.
|
|
ICC ships only have 1-4 armor components and roughly around 4-5 shield components, though, UGTO and Kluth ships have 4-8 usually. Kluth armor also benefits from higher regeneration rates, as far as I know, so they will not be as disadvantaged.
Quote:
|
Not sure what you're trying to achive by lowering the armour repair rate, unless you also plan to increase hull repair rate. Otherwise, there will be even less combat in the MV.
|
|
Than buff the HP of shields and armor. The prime problem seems to be that most durability from ships in the metaverse stems from regeneration from depot/platform whoring.
[ This Message was edited by: Leopard on 2010-05-15 09:44 ]
_________________
Ghostly Specter of an Ancient Past.
|
Bardiche
Chief Marshal
Joined: November 16, 2006
Posts: 1247
| Posted: 2010-05-15 10:40
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-15 08:29, Nimitz wrote:
That would put UGTO and Kluth to a disadvantage, unless armour is also removed from ICC ships since the larger ICC ships have both shields and armour. |
|
That would put them at a disadvantage defence-wise against... the defence faction?
_________________
|
Pakhos[+R]
Chief Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: May 31, 2002
Posts: 1352
From: Clean room lab
| Posted: 2010-05-15 11:33
Well seems like everyone thinks from their point of faction view. We arent going to solve anything like that.
Really, armor/hull repair rate only benefits ugto. There is no such a thing as fast combat for icc or kluth. Reasons are simple. Icc needs to wait for their shield to recharge and the shield cant be recharged by anything but giving it some time to do it. (Please icc players drop some data here about shield recharge time for their ships). Same for kluth , the play style of kluth dont allow us to go and repair in a depot planet. Ok from point of ugto view ; AHr is a great tool. But Ahr isnt that perfect. For example , My scrab spends 17 AHR for 1% hull repair.Also this equal to 17 seconds for 1 % hull. If i am at 10% hull , this means I would need 1530(limit is 1000 ahr per cruiser and 1000x2 for dreads) ahr and more than 25 mins to be repaired 100% by ahr.
So fast combat works for ugto only. I have seen many times dreads jump out to be repaired. For example , some ugto vets jumps at 40% hull 10% armor and come back less than a minute with same ship but 60% hull 100% armor.
_________________
* 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: 2010-05-15 12:53
i seriously doubt you can repair 20 hull on a dread in a minute, unless you have a MASSIVE ammount of depots. As in, 20 depots and 5 stations or somethign like that. In wich case, having that many concentrate on a single ship, isnt exactly strange that it repairs fast.
_________________
|
Azreal
Chief Marshal
Joined: March 14, 2004
Posts: 2816
From: United State of Texas, Houston
| Posted: 2010-05-15 15:11
99.9% of these ideas are horrible, wrong, and based on one sided points of view.
If My spawning an already spawned ship is going to require yet MORE resources from a planet, especially considering the amount of pathetically USELESS planets in the Sag server, then I can see I wont be bothering.
If I am going to be made to sit for 5+ minutes in order to repair a ship and get back into combat, I can see now, I wont be bothering.
If combat is slowed down any more than it already is, I can see now I wont be bothering.
These are just bad bad bad ideas. Sorry if it hurts some feelings, but the truth usually does that.
_________________
bucket link
|
Pakhos[+R]
Chief Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: May 31, 2002
Posts: 1352
From: Clean room lab
| Posted: 2010-05-15 17:23
Quote:
|
On 2010-05-15 15:11, Azreal wrote:
99.9% of these ideas are horrible, wrong, and based on one sided points of view.
If My spawning an already spawned ship is going to require yet MORE resources from a planet, especially considering the amount of pathetically USELESS planets in the Sag server, then I can see I wont be bothering.
If I am going to be made to sit for 5+ minutes in order to repair a ship and get back into combat, I can see now, I wont be bothering.
If combat is slowed down any more than it already is, I can see now I wont be bothering.
These are just bad bad bad ideas. Sorry if it hurts some feelings, but the truth usually does that.
|
|
99.9%? I would like to see that 0.1 % of yours . Throw some ideas and lets see how good it is. Other wise really dont bother.
_________________
* 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."
|
Fatal Command (CO)
Marshal
Fatal Squadron
Joined: November 27, 2002
Posts: 1158
From: over here in New York noticing some ppl are like canoes.....they need to be paddled.
| Posted: 2010-05-15 22:44
WARNING....INCOMING WALL OF TEXT
On ICC shields recharge rate. it sucks plain and simple.it is not affected by anything but time.and time can be and is ICCs greatest enemy.
We lose more ships and planets due to inability to return to combat within a comparable timeframe as the other 2 factions.I had been sitting and thinking and looking at my shields and how they work and recharge .ICC is,according to the devs and the official description,the "defensive" faction.with that in mind I have to wonder why ,when rotating shields,I dont pull power from available energy,but rather from the other arcs of shielding.That rotation then cause me a major loss of defensive capabilty as now I have less shielding all around rather than just the 1 arc.
with that thought in mind I came up with the following idea.
Instead of boosting an arc of shields by pulling power from the other 3,why not pull it from available energy?.Doing so would give us the ability to stay in fight longer at a cost of having to fire less often or fly a lil slower.the ability to rotate would stay the same,it would just cost you E .all the other shileds would stay at current lvl til boosted by the pilot,if and when is was needed.
Once all power is drained,not only can you no longer fire your weapons,you can no longer boost shields .That would mean you would have to do one of the following.
1.jump out of area to a fairly safe place,come to a dead stop and rebuild your E while boosting all your shields back to full at the same time.That would put ICC on par with Kluth as far as watching energy consuption.
2.jump to nearest friendly planet/safe area and stop completely so where engines can recharge at full capability,then boost shielding,then let E rebuild,then jump back to fight.
3.ICC would not need to return to a SS or sup plat unless armor/hull gone,which would put us on same par as UGTO in that we can stay til we are damaged enough to need that supply or plat.
but the MAIN issue with shields is the reducing other shields to boost the 1.Neither Kluth or UGTO have to give up anything for repair or recharge of their defensive capabilities yet ICC has to Lower their to such a state that they have to totally withdraw from the fight and the area then wait an UNREASONBLEY LONG time for shields to regen back to full.
It takes longer to damage UGTO/Kluth armor than it does for them to repair them to full.ICC on the otherhand are the exact opposite,Takes longer to repair back to full than it does to damage them.
In what way does it seem to you that ICC IS in fact the "defensive Faction" the Developers AND the OFFICIAL description says ICC is?
In my opinion,UGTO IS the defensive/offensive faction.They have 3 types of armor,unbeatable repair time,and weps that chew up ICC and Kluth ships and TAKE the damage at close range,which IS their main ability as things are now.
ICCs MAIN concern developers, is NOT better weps,more range,faster firing or more hull /armor.Its ICCs lack of comparable regenning of shielding that is in line with the other 2 factions repair rate.
In short.Please consider the pulling power for shield boosting from the available energy NOT from the other shields.ALL ICC ship energy rebuilds at a nice high rate and wouldnt need but the SMALLEST of tweaks to balance it out between both UGTO and kluth ship energy recharge rates.
ok...end of wall of text.
_________________
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
