| Author |
Why nerf ions? |
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
|  Posted: 2010-04-05 02:10
Quote:
|
On 2010-04-05 00:01, Jamesbond [R33] wrote:
Maybe the devs need to start giving people who use dictors or extractors some bonus prestige to start getting these ships into combat more. This is supposed to be mostly a fleet game, so start acting like one.
|
|
Yeah. I like this idea. But every second an enemy ship is caught in the dictor field, you get prestige. Normal prestige, I mean... not bonus. (God only knows what those are for anyway.... well, ok, Devs too  )
This way, the ICC can get someone to keep the Uggies at arm's length while pelting them with missiles.
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
The Fridge
Chief Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: December 13, 2008
Posts: 559
From: In Your Fridge, Eating your Foods.
| Posted: 2010-04-05 02:44
Quote:
|
On 2010-04-05 00:01, Jamesbond [R33] wrote:
Maybe the devs need to start giving people who use dictors or extractors some bonus prestige to start getting these ships into combat more. This is supposed to be mostly a fleet game, so start acting like one.
|
|
Uggies lack Fleet Tactics, ICC is the most diverse when it comes to the ships we choose. We are by no means on our high horses with dreads and stations as much as Uggies and K'luth.
=L
Although giving Pres to Extractors/Dictors would be nice.
Ions need Range, That is all.
[ This Message was edited by: The Fridge on 2010-04-05 02:45 ]
[ This Message was edited by: The Fridge on 2010-04-05 02:47 ]
_________________
|
Riley!
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 29, 2002
Posts: 257
| Posted: 2010-04-05 03:29
I think its great that the game is being updated on a regular bases, but maybe you should focus on aspects of the game that actually need attention because this is stupid. What are you guys thinking?
You are in the midst of a change that will determine if DarkSpace is going to continue to operate.. and your first instict is to implement a change that effectively limits an entire factions offensive capabilities?
I realize there are additional updates to follow that will tweak more weapons, and balance things out a bit.. and the new missles... BUT if those parts are not finished yet, why would you implement this change so prematurely?
Last time I checked, ICC was a long range faction. Last time I checked nobody was complaining about Ions being too uber.
Lets be serious: Nobody likes this. It is unnecessary. If you arent going to listen to the playerbase on this, then why should anybody donate anything to you?
BTW -- last night I could effectively fight kluth in my assault dread and now I can't specifically because of this range change. This change, in the current game configuration, more or less ruined the assault dread.
I'm really confused if you are serious about keeping the game alive.
..and sorry if I seem rude, its just that I get annoyed when history starts to repeat itself.
[ This Message was edited by: Riley! on 2010-04-05 03:32 ]
[ This Message was edited by: Riley! on 2010-04-05 04:03 ]
_________________
|
Drafell
Grand Admiral
Mythica
Joined: May 30, 2003
Posts: 2449
From: United Kingdom
| Posted: 2010-04-05 05:23
I had not designed current weapon values with enhancements in mind. Before we were able to largely gloss over the effect they had due to the limited availability, but not any more.
A brief summary of ranges.
Close: 0-400gu
Medium: 400-1500gu
Long: 1500-2500gu
Very Long: 2500gu+
Things to think about.
What happens when you start applying enhancments to all of these 'nerfed' weapons?
Try applying a 48% range increase via enhancements to Ion cannons, then apply the same increase to QST's or SI's:
* Ion Cannon: 1290gu to 1909gu.
* QST: 1050gu to 1554gu.
* SI: 800gu to 1148gu.
And to everything else:
* EMP: 725gu to 1073gu
* PSI Cannon: 800gu to 1148gu
* Plasma Cannon: 800gu to 1148gu
* Particle Cannon: 925gu to 1369gu
* Railgun: 1225gu to 1813gu
* Gauss Cannon: 1410gu 2086gu
It seems ICC will dominate between 1540gu to 2086gu, which is (oh noes) long range!
Has anyone also noticed that weapons with falloff get hit twice when range is 'nerfed'? Falloff damage is a linear gradient over range; reducing the range also reduces the damage at any given range. Weapons with falloff are EMP Cannon, PSI Cannon, and Particle Cannon.
Other important issues.
The more projectiles we have in the game at any given time, the higher the CPU usage. Reducing the range of these weapons means they are in the game for less time. This translates directly into the CPU time being used per projectile. Dumb projectiles do not use nearly as much CPU processing times as other weapons such as missiles or fighters, but they still have a relatively significant impact, especially when you get into the bigger fights due to the continual collision detection checks.
Even after a projectile has missed a target, the game still has to keep checking in the area of that projectile to make sure there are no other targets its can run into. This check needs to be processed several times a second and is relatively CPU intensive to do.
The sheer number of projectiles and collision detections that are being processed can put a lot of load on the server and anything we can do to reduce this will eventually have a knock on impact on the game experience for the end user.
Meaning you.
Less CPU use for game objects means we can support more players per server. More players per server equals more fun as there are more red things to shoot at.
Summary
If you care to think about this, I hope you will all see that what has been changed and the reasons for adjustments are pretty obvious and necessary when you actually know the facts.
Q: Why change what works?
A: It would not keep working that well with the increased player numbers we should be seeing.
This said, I also realize that no matter how much we try to explain, some users will simply not get it or agree.
You cannot please everyone.
[ This Message was edited by: Drafell on 2010-04-05 05:36 ]
_________________
It's gone now, no longer here...Yet still I see, and still I fear.rnrn
rnrn
DarkSpace Developer - Retired
|
Starcommander
Marshal
Joined: December 14, 2005
Posts: 579
From: In your base, stealing your cookies
| Posted: 2010-04-05 05:51
No you can't please everyone but in this case not only did you make an entire faction mad but well over half of the community that posts here as well (the verbal ones at least).
Ya less particles means less CPU usage however there are other things that can be done to decease CPU usage, like AI, or a better CPU for the server. Ranges are way short compared to detection range (5kgu) and ICC ranges were usually proportional to that.
With this nerf on range, 3 ships literally just became scrap heaps. The Nest, Line station and Battle Stations all just become worthless. Especially the Line Station, adding enh to increase range back to where it used to be will be a waist of slots that would be better used for damage or defense. Increasing slots could help this but other issues would occur.
The nerf dose give missiles unsurpassed range but they ALREADY HAD THAT. Missiles can be countered easy and are now the only thing that can be used to fire into a planets firing range. Yes ICC with there long range IC could in fact fire just outside of a planets fire range (2k). This was most helpful in pulling UGTO out into an open fight. Also helped in hitting cloaked Kluth at range as well (if you were skilled). Now its only a mere 200gu difference between ranges, something that is easily overcame with UGTO. ICC is NOT, repeat, NOT a mid range/close range faction which literally is what you guys just did with this update and the next one. You just basically killed any long range fighting capability's that ICC had. Missiles don't work against Kluth what are you going to do about that?
Congratulations on a clean kill, now I just wonder. Who's next?
Welcome to Dead Space.
_________________
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.
|
mannythepogs
Grand Admiral
Pitch Black
Joined: July 12, 2007
Posts: 140
From: mbllanes
| Posted: 2010-04-05 06:38
Developers Side says they need to reduce CPU usage,
Players side says, why Nerf us, we can't fight what we have etc etc..
We'll i says, Devs. can do what they want, this is now a FREE game after all.
If you don't like ICC, go Uggies, if you says Kluth (cloack) is IMBA, then go Kluth, nobodys stopping you.
If this is Faction Lock in the beginning, you have the justification to complain, but it is not, you can change faction all day long. So everyone try to live with it and Enjoy the FREE GAME.
LOL.
_________________
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2010-04-05 07:12
Quote:
|
On 2010-04-05 05:23, Drafell wrote:
I had not designed current weapon values with enhancements in mind. Before we were able to largely gloss over the effect they had due to the limited availability, but not any more.
A brief summary of ranges.
Close: 0-400gu
Medium: 400-1500gu
Long: 1500-2500gu
Very Long: 2500gu+
Things to think about.
What happens when you start applying enhancments to all of these 'nerfed' weapons?
Try applying a 48% range increase via enhancements to Ion cannons, then apply the same increase to QST's or SI's:
* Ion Cannon: 1290gu to 1909gu.
* QST: 1050gu to 1554gu.
* SI: 800gu to 1148gu.
And to everything else:
* EMP: 725gu to 1073gu
* PSI Cannon: 800gu to 1148gu
* Plasma Cannon: 800gu to 1148gu
* Particle Cannon: 925gu to 1369gu
* Railgun: 1225gu to 1813gu
* Gauss Cannon: 1410gu 2086gu
It seems ICC will dominate between 1540gu to 2086gu, which is (oh noes) long range!
Has anyone also noticed that weapons with falloff get hit twice when range is 'nerfed'? Falloff damage is a linear gradient over range; reducing the range also reduces the damage at any given range. Weapons with falloff are EMP Cannon, PSI Cannon, and Particle Cannon.
Other important issues.
The more projectiles we have in the game at any given time, the higher the CPU usage. Reducing the range of these weapons means they are in the game for less time. This translates directly into the CPU time being used per projectile. Dumb projectiles do not use nearly as much CPU processing times as other weapons such as missiles or fighters, but they still have a relatively significant impact, especially when you get into the bigger fights due to the continual collision detection checks.
Even after a projectile has missed a target, the game still has to keep checking in the area of that projectile to make sure there are no other targets its can run into. This check needs to be processed several times a second and is relatively CPU intensive to do.
The sheer number of projectiles and collision detections that are being processed can put a lot of load on the server and anything we can do to reduce this will eventually have a knock on impact on the game experience for the end user.
Meaning you.
Less CPU use for game objects means we can support more players per server. More players per server equals more fun as there are more red things to shoot at.
Summary
If you care to think about this, I hope you will all see that what has been changed and the reasons for adjustments are pretty obvious and necessary when you actually know the facts.
Q: Why change what works?
A: It would not keep working that well with the increased player numbers we should be seeing.
This said, I also realize that no matter how much we try to explain, some users will simply not get it or agree.
You cannot please everyone.
[ This Message was edited by: Drafell on 2010-04-05 05:36 ]
|
|
What you say does make sense. But why then did you not implement a range reduction across the board?
Missile range goes down. Beam range down. Detection range down. Everything 10 to 15 percent down. Would have seemed more credible. O
But you're talking about CPU overheads while another dev might cite game balance. So what is the real objective here?
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2010-04-05 07:17
Quote:
|
On 2010-04-05 06:38, mannythepogs wrote:
Developers Side says they need to reduce CPU usage,
Players side says, why Nerf us, we can't fight what we have etc etc..
We'll i says, Devs. can do what they want, this is now a FREE game after all.
If you don't like ICC, go Uggies, if you says Kluth (cloack) is IMBA, then go Kluth, nobodys stopping you.
If this is Faction Lock in the beginning, you have the justification to complain, but it is not, you can change faction all day long. So everyone try to live with it and Enjoy the FREE GAME.
LOL.
|
|
The really angry ppl are the fleeted ones. So now what? All fleets move to UGTO? Let's make this a 2 sided game then?
It is a free game indeed. But even then, the wants n need of the community must be taken into consideration. After all, some of those complaining are still paying subscriptions or donations.
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
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: 2010-04-05 10:37
Quote:
|
On 2010-04-05 07:17, Kenny_Naboo wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2010-04-05 06:38, mannythepogs wrote:
Developers Side says they need to reduce CPU usage,
Players side says, why Nerf us, we can't fight what we have etc etc..
We'll i says, Devs. can do what they want, this is now a FREE game after all.
If you don't like ICC, go Uggies, if you says Kluth (cloack) is IMBA, then go Kluth, nobodys stopping you.
If this is Faction Lock in the beginning, you have the justification to complain, but it is not, you can change faction all day long. So everyone try to live with it and Enjoy the FREE GAME.
LOL.
|
|
The really angry ppl are the fleeted ones. So now what? All fleets move to UGTO? Let's make this a 2 sided game then?
It is a free game indeed. But even then, the wants n need of the community must be taken into consideration. After all, some of those complaining are still paying subscriptions or donations.
|
|
ICC is already,with this change,a neutered ugto type faction in my opinion.Why would I go from something I loved,to something the developers are shoving down my throat?
kinda funny that the ONE developer that plays ICC on a REGULAR basis,not for one week only,didnt even know the change was coming.
and more nerfs incoming for ICC.
_________________
|
Anathemia
1st Rear Admiral
Joined: June 23, 2009
Posts: 38
| Posted: 2010-04-05 10:38
I find it interesting how some people say "Go UGTO or K'luth..."
Isn't that part of the reason we have such few numbers to begin with? What's the point of of ICC being a playable faction? It's there to be played. Some people have a little bit more honor (probably stubborness too -.-) to keep with a single faction through the ups and downs instead of just the ups.
Back on topic, This isn't exactly the first time something like this has happened... I'm guessing since the devs obviously are in the middle of working things out we just wait for them to finish. I dunno, maybe they'll end up doing some good overall. We've waited years for some things.
We can wait quite a bit longer.
_________________
Being a troll ftw.
|
UnknownWarrior
Grand Admiral
Raven Warriors
Joined: July 18, 2002
Posts: 724
From: North Carolina, USA
| Posted: 2010-04-05 11:01
Im sure things may, MAY, have been a little more accepted if ALL the changes with weapons etc would have been pushed through in one patch instead of nerfing one side just completely out of the blue.
But its just as everyone else here has said. We can understand the Devs point of view with reducing CPU usage on the servers, which results in less lag for the players and better performance. However, the feelings of the community arent being taken into consideration here. And AFAIK (Correct me if Im wrong), but this little update wasnt even tested in Beta. So theres no way sufficient ICC players have tested it to give their input.
One ICC Dev isnt enough here guys, and if rumors are true that this Dev didnt even know about the update until after the fact, then it just makes things look even worse.
Its a community based game here guys, Free or not. When a large chunk of the community starts going into a raging fit (1/3-1/2 of the community)over something, red flags should start popping up.
_________________
|
Riley!
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 29, 2002
Posts: 257
| Posted: 2010-04-05 15:26
of course enhancements increase weapon values.. because they are ENHANCEMENTS. You may have not taken into consideration that the weapon values were going to be so great but id much rather see a cap put on ships for how many enh they can stack instead of seeing an entire faction get nerfed WITHOUT WARNING.
You fixed what you considered to be a problem, uh huh.
Now everyone is pissed off.. what are you going to do now??????
Continue justifying your position on this ridiculous update that people have made clear they dont want?
Or will you revert changes, throw the new code in beta with the other code you plan to release, test it and release it when its ready?
Either way.. you guys have zero public relations skills and after seeing this happen the way it did.. I will be shocked and amazed if ya'll are still here in 6 months.
Edit: went in game, no motivation to play. not sure if these feelings will stick or not but you really killed the game for me. Your like the george bush of darkspace, changing things at will with no regard for the people. out of all the years and loosing so much of the playerbase i would think a company would be smart enough to realize what its assets are and what to do to correct its problems. guess i'm expecting too much.
[ This Message was edited by: Riley! on 2010-04-05 15:35 ]
_________________
|
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
