| Author |
1.670 |
DubStep Santa
Marshal
Joined: July 23, 2004
Posts: 80
From: Atlanta GA
|  Posted: 2011-07-25 23:00
thanks for fixing the ANR armor rep, thats the only thing that botherd me to the point of smashing kittens faces
_________________
Oh hello there, you know me, i am that guy with that battle dread that you can't blow up....
NUTS
|
MarineKingPrime
Marshal
Exathra Alliance Fleet
Joined: October 04, 2010
Posts: 239
From: CSS CheezyBagels
| Posted: 2011-07-25 23:11
Quote:
|
On 2011-07-25 22:32, *XO*Defiance wrote:
There are some major issues in the way you achieved balance between icc and ugto.
[ This Message was edited by: *XO*Defiance on 2011-07-25 22:42 ]
|
|
do tell
_________________
|
Talien
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: May 11, 2010
Posts: 2044
From: Michigan
| Posted: 2011-07-25 23:30
Some issues:
Active shield's HP reduced by approximately 30%, this means Reactives are now better in every respect than Actives. Active still has more HP than Reactive, but Reactive has almost 2x the regen and better resistances. Actives need some kind of buff to make them useful again.
Composite armor is more effective at damage absorption than shields with the armor/shield changes in beta.
Ablative/Reflective armor HP also seems to have been increased, but the difference in ablative vs standard against energy is negligible even though ablative is supposed to have a weakness to energy.
Combat Dread vs Battle Dread, both ships stock layouts with no enh.
Test 1, started at 600 GU range, CD kept range while firing rearward, BD jumped close, CD jumped away, kept range, BD couldn't do anything and test was aborted.
Test 2, started at 500 GU and kept close. BD won with 45% hull.
_________________
Adapt or die.
|
MarineKingPrime
Marshal
Exathra Alliance Fleet
Joined: October 04, 2010
Posts: 239
From: CSS CheezyBagels
| Posted: 2011-07-25 23:45
I would say the armor buff/shield nerf was too extreme. Maybe tone it down to 15%?
_________________
|
CM7
Midshipman
Faster than Light
Joined: October 15, 2009
Posts: 1812
| Posted: 2011-07-26 00:05
Resuls skewed by Multy Core being enabled.
retracted
[ This Message was edited by: *XO*Defiance on 2011-07-26 06:11 ]
_________________
Defiance and Opposition, a tribute to teamwork. I will remember always
339,144
|
Xavier I. Agamemnon
Grand Admiral
Exathra Alliance Fleet
Joined: October 12, 2010
Posts: 357
From: Babylon5
| Posted: 2011-07-26 00:21
well i think i have a problum for some odd reason i can play all day and my pristige never got beyond 62000
_________________
Xavier I. Agamemnon
CD/I.C.S Spartacus
HC/I.C.S Athena
CDD/I.C.S Achilles
Leader of the Exathra Alliance Fleet.
|
Talien
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: May 11, 2010
Posts: 2044
From: Michigan
| Posted: 2011-07-26 00:23
That's right, I almost forgot about the HC vs Parasite tests. Parasite ran out of energy multiple times and eventually ran out of AHR, so we finally just aborted the test because it wasn't getting anywhere. Between rounds the HC was back to full shields and had a significant amount of armor repaired naturally by the time the Parasite had regenerated it's energy and partial armor/hull.
This is also further evidence that ELF are not a good substitute for an aux reactor, their power drain is negligible, they do negligible damage, and have a horrid cooldown time.
Parasite had an equally dismal performance against a Torpedo Cruiser, even with the TC sitting still and not firing back the Parasite was unable to break through a single arc of reflective armor before running out of power, and barely broke through a single arc of standard armor.
_________________
Adapt or die.
|
CM7
Midshipman
Faster than Light
Joined: October 15, 2009
Posts: 1812
| Posted: 2011-07-26 00:29
^^
yea but ICC vs UGTO, thats the broken balance. peh.
_________________
Defiance and Opposition, a tribute to teamwork. I will remember always
339,144
|
Pegasus
Grand Admiral
Pitch Black
Joined: August 02, 2005
Posts: 434
From: Eleventh galaxy on the right!
| Posted: 2011-07-26 03:33
Quote:
|
On 2011-07-26 00:05, *XO*Defiance wrote:
Kluth Cruiser (one with beams Abeams and elf) cannot do enough damage to a HC to negate its shield/armor regen rate.
|
|
None of the K'luth cruisers do, testing in beta against a HC a Scale failed miserably, even using sneak hit and run tactics. Fridge and myself and Tommas tested this and it was embaressing. Even if Fridge and I went 2 vs 1 the HC still would of won on energy/hull/armour. The test was a few days before .670 went live, so whether energy output on the HC has changed since then you got a tough little cookie.
K'luth cruisers will have to fly in packs of three or more to be effective.
_________________
Retired K'luth Combateer
|
CM7
Midshipman
Faster than Light
Joined: October 15, 2009
Posts: 1812
| Posted: 2011-07-26 04:11
As an Executive officer and founder of one of the fore running fleets of ICC, I cannot sit by and watch this overcompensation to come to pass without opposing the principals that brought about such a change.
In version 670 all ships are re-designed to fulfill specific roles through the clever manipulation of device composition and layout. In regards to the two human factions, no documented changes were performed to their individual devices that would boon or hinder their operation, the exception to this statement being Pulse shields, Flux waves and lazer weapons. Pulse shields no longer affect friendly projectiles at a cost to efficiency. Flux waves no longer damage friendly ships. Lazer weapons received some kind of buff/nerf that I still don’t quite understand, but overall made them more efficient.
For the most part, 670 load-outs have seen a dramatic increase in combat ships damage output over their 660 predecessors. The only change to ICC combat ships defensive load-outs that I am aware of are the Assault Dreadnaught, Border Cruiser, Strike Cruiser, and Stations.
The Assault Dreadnaught lost a fore arc of shields in favor of a second layer of armor. The AD now has five plates of armor and four arks of shield. Having been an ICC pilot for two years, I can tell you this reduced the Assault Dreadnaughts defensive abilities by a large margin. AD now suffers from reduced turn rate as well. Preliminary tests of the AD Vs EAD showed that the AD was lacking proper defensive or offensive capabilities needed to beat the EAD in a one on one fight with stock layouts. Then, out of the blue, reactive shields were buffed Vs all damage types except EMP and ELF. Reactive shields then became a viable option for alternative defensive solutions. Assault Dreads equipped reactive shields were then superior to the EAD for reasons that are classified by FTL.
The Border Cruiser is a fine example of why shields are superior to armor in nearly every way in 670. The IBC is fast on acceleration and yaw enough to dodge most shots fired at it from over 400gu away by any ship. Double layers of shields ensure that any damage taken does not penetrate the hull and is quickly nullified by superior recharge rates. In short the ship is a fine example of what ICC technology is capable of. To have such a fine ship hit with a -30% in HP without any real compensation is just wrong. Slapping some armor on this bird is not the answer either. She is a masterpiece. Instead of wrecking works of art, why not make one ship on each faction that exemplifies and embodies the essence of that faction in every aspect of its being the same way this ship does, or did pending the nerf, for the ICC?
The Strike cruiser- assessment Classified by FTL for further review.
Our stations received a much needed boost on defensive capability with the implementation of four single arc armor plates. This increases the repair rate of our stations to be on par, and surpass UGTO stations. Defensively ICC stations finally take the lead.
The point of all this? UGTO weapons are more powerful than ICC weapons at x range. Layouts of ships in question nearly identically mirror each other in terms of number of weapons, arcs, and placements. UGTO armor and ICC shields were unchanged by 670 layout tweaks. Neither was ICC or UGTO weapon damage outputs. With this in mind, equal numbers of guns on each ship should not have change balance. And damn sure should not have drawn you to the conclusion that UGTO needs a boost in defensive HP by 25%. ICC shields are what set us apart from UGTO. Our shields are what holds K’luth back long enough for us to fight them. This “balancing act” you have committed yourself to has only weakened ICC’s ability to fight off K’luth dreadnaughts (lets face it. K’luth other ships are crap and no threat to ICC at all) while at the same time substantially increased UGTO’s ability to fight off said K’luth Dreadnaughts.
This withstanding, I do not deny that there is a major problem with UGTO’s ability to fight ICC and K’luth at this time. I would even go so far to say that ICC is the strongest faction overall. K’luth versus ICC battles tend to be very balanced and challenging for both parties. Reducing both our offensive and defensive capabilities to this extent is paramount to throwing us under the bus. UGTO will take its place as most powerful race, followed by k’luth, with ICC as their lapdogs yet again. I know the dev team does not try to balance the game around enhancements but… UGTO armor is buffed 25%. You can equip 49% worth of defense enhancements. This gives UGTO dreadnaughts a total of 174% of the defensive HP. Armor received a 25% hp boost to what was already the most hp of any defensive device I might add. Why should UGTO get to troll around with 175%-200% of the defensive HP of the other factions? Its probably more like 225% when you look at it versus K’luth. UGTO is not the defensive faction! You want to equal them out? Then Tweak weapon damage values and falloff rates. For every 10% reduction to ICC weapons give us back 5% range. For every 10% damage increase of UGTO weapons give them +5% falloff ranges…
Anything about, would be better than this.
I apologize for my Defiance.
[ This Message was edited by: *XO*Defiance on 2011-07-26 06:32 ]
_________________
Defiance and Opposition, a tribute to teamwork. I will remember always
339,144
|
Pantheon
Marshal
Palestar
Joined: May 29, 2001
Posts: 1789
| Posted: 2011-07-26 05:28
There is no way Standard armour repairs faster than Organic. I'm betting you have the Multi-Core issue, which is throwing off pretty much all your results.
Also, you keep voiding all the fights where ICC excel? I don't understand this... You're basically saying "Everytime I jump away to gain range so I do more damage than him, we voided the battle because I jumped away. When we fought at close range, where ICC's range advantage is lessened, UGTO won"...
_________________
|
Azure Prower
Chief Marshal
Joined: March 14, 2006
Posts: 309
| Posted: 2011-07-26 06:11
Quote:
|
On 2011-07-26 05:28, Pantheon wrote:
Also, you keep voiding all the fights where ICC excel? I don't understand this... You're basically saying "Everytime I jump away to gain range so I do more damage than him, we voided the battle because I jumped away. When we fought at close range, where ICC's range advantage is lessened, UGTO won"...
|
|
Because in typical multi-verse battles. Range is null and void.
An enemy dread jumps you as ICC. You counter by jumping away to where you can still fire at range. K'luth negates this advantage by cloaking. UGTO negates the advantage by jumping you with another dread and there goes your range advantage.
Missile ships can get away with this range disadvantage because their missiles hit hard. A brawling combat/assault ship on the other hand doesn't have much room to work with.
Range only works in one versus one - if that. We all know DarkSpace isn't a glorified dueling game as much as some people hope it to be.
_________________
http://www.youtube.com/user/AzurePrower
|
CM7
Midshipman
Faster than Light
Joined: October 15, 2009
Posts: 1812
| Posted: 2011-07-26 06:17
in the test panth is talking about, i dueled him CD vs GD.
First i was keeping my range.
A little while into the battle when i had lost about 30% of my armor i closed distance with him to knife fight range.
The battle was close from there. I died and panth had 14%?? hull left.
The battle could have been decieded by one more zig, or zag.. a faster shield rotation instead of a failed dodge... one more torp salvo connecting.
Point is i gave up my range advantage after i was wounded and still amost won.
In this test i can say ICC, UGTO were even. ICC may even still be stronger.
(i could have sworn i posted this befor panth... not sure what happen)
_________________
Defiance and Opposition, a tribute to teamwork. I will remember always
339,144
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2011-07-26 06:39
Quote:
|
On 2011-07-26 03:33, Pegasus wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2011-07-26 00:05, *XO*Defiance wrote:
Kluth Cruiser (one with beams Abeams and elf) cannot do enough damage to a HC to negate its shield/armor regen rate.
|
|
None of the K'luth cruisers do, testing in beta against a HC a Scale failed miserably, even using sneak hit and run tactics. Fridge and myself and Tommas tested this and it was embaressing. Even if Fridge and I went 2 vs 1 the HC still would of won on energy/hull/armour. The test was a few days before .670 went live, so whether energy output on the HC has changed since then you got a tough little cookie.
K'luth cruisers will have to fly in packs of three or more to be effective.
|
|
Honestly, the only cruisers being fielded are Clavates and Piercers for their specific roles.
I tried a Scale today in the MV. It's completely useless against anything larger than a dessie. And people say that Kluth are fielding dreads only..... 
Back to Jack.
Don't nerf ICC shields or weapon output. You're doing it all wrong again this way. We can't always make a knee-jerk reaction everytime you find something not right in the balance.
What you need to do is to buff UGTO armor slightly and the weap outputs. Then test it again. Don't touch ICC stats yet.
A one-on-one test situation is not good enough. You have to take into account how battles are fought in the MV. As Talien said, and I noted, UGTO were being outnumbered by ICC lately. Hell, that goes for Kluth too, though we did outnumber them at some point.
I say ICC and Kluth are pretty much even this round. So far our battles have been swinging back and forth. While we may be able to kill their ships quickly if we get the drop on them, they can eventually overcome us by virtue of sheer durability... and we have to run away to rep or die in the process.
As I observed, UGTO are still playing their old way, using stations to front their attack. And sadly, hugging planets just don't work anymore for them. Their mainstay fleet, RSM, is also missing at the moment. So until we see numbers on their side, I don't think we can conclusively say that UGTO sucks.
Give them a boost. But don't nerf the other factions at the same time.
[ This Message was edited by: Kenny_Naboo[+R] on 2011-07-26 06:45 ]
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
CM7
Midshipman
Faster than Light
Joined: October 15, 2009
Posts: 1812
| Posted: 2011-07-26 06:57
there in lies the problem.
UGTO armor and ICC armor are the same gadget. Hecannot boost one without boosting the other. Hence the reduction in shield HP.
_________________
Defiance and Opposition, a tribute to teamwork. I will remember always
339,144
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
