| Author |
[1.701] Release Feedback |
Pantheon
Marshal
Palestar
Joined: May 29, 2001
Posts: 1789
|  Posted: 2013-10-28 19:03
1.701 has been released and we intend to fire off emails at the end of the week if all goes well.
A fix for the map edges has already been made, it just needs a rebuild of the maps, which will hopefully be pushed before the end of the week.
Please post any 1.701 feedback here.
_________________
|
Chewy Squirrel
Chief Marshal
Joined: January 27, 2003
Posts: 304
From: NYC
| Posted: 2013-10-28 19:35
Can we talk about the undocumented surprise nerf to the ICC pulse shield? I'm totally cool with the defence nerf for ICC, but further nerfing an already nerfed faction special gadget seems excessive. It can't even hit fighters anymore-even on the station grade pulse shield- and its usefulness was questionable at the old 65% chance of detonation, and now it sometimes feel like it isn't doing anything at the new 50% chance.
_________________
|
Borgie
Chief Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: August 15, 2005
Posts: 2256
From: close by
| Posted: 2013-10-28 19:44
i think its a good thing, icc currently has the best point defence in the game( as they rightfully should being a defenscive faction), now icc will have to make the choice of anti fighter with the long range pulse beams, or the faster fighter short range pulse beams. just like luth had to adapt to the slap in the face for cloak changes icc must adapt to that minor change.
_________________
|
iwancoppa2
Ensign
Joined: October 23, 2013
Posts: 12
| Posted: 2013-10-28 22:03
Quote:
On 2013-10-28 19:35, Chewy Squirrel wrote:
Can we talk about the undocumented surprise nerf to the ICC pulse shield? I'm totally cool with the defence nerf for ICC, but further nerfing an already nerfed faction special gadget seems excessive. It can't even hit fighters anymore-even on the station grade pulse shield- and its usefulness was questionable at the old 65% chance of detonation, and now it sometimes feel like it isn't doing anything at the new 50% chance.
|
While I did enjoy the 65% pulse shield, it was a bit OP.
Consider this; ICC gets the best PD. Your anti-missiles can usually stop 2 missiles per salvo instead of one, negating direct hit damage on one missile. You've also got competitive anti-fighter beams. Having the pulse shield easily wipe out fighters removes any need to take anti-fighter beams as pressing V will significantly reduce the number of enemy fighters anyway.
Also, your faction gadget just happens to scale with hull size. Looking at you, flux wave...
_________________
|
Scorched Soul[+R]
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: November 14, 2005
Posts: 378
From: USA, NJ, Princeton
| Posted: 2013-10-28 22:15
Do the Cooldown enhancements increase the energy drain/ second because if they dont 24% damage + 24% weapon cooldown might as well be 48% weapon damage...
_________________
|
Sheraton*XO*
Chief Marshal
Faster than Light
Joined: January 18, 2013
Posts: 482
From: Keel Mountains
| Posted: 2013-10-28 22:55
Quote:
On 2013-10-28 22:03, iwancoppa2 wrote:
Quote:
On 2013-10-28 19:35, Chewy Squirrel wrote:
Can we talk about the undocumented surprise nerf to the ICC pulse shield? I'm totally cool with the defence nerf for ICC, but further nerfing an already nerfed faction special gadget seems excessive. It can't even hit fighters anymore-even on the station grade pulse shield- and its usefulness was questionable at the old 65% chance of detonation, and now it sometimes feel like it isn't doing anything at the new 50% chance.
|
While I did enjoy the 65% pulse shield, it was a bit OP.
Consider this; ICC gets the best PD. Your anti-missiles can usually stop 2 missiles per salvo instead of one, negating direct hit damage on one missile. You've also got competitive anti-fighter beams. Having the pulse shield easily wipe out fighters removes any need to take anti-fighter beams as pressing V will significantly reduce the number of enemy fighters anyway.
Also, your faction gadget just happens to scale with hull size. Looking at you, flux wave...
|
Incorrect. The pulse shield is now set to a base 300 across the board and 50% chance. It's essentially a coin flip as to whether or not it does anything now. At least with 65% you could reliably count on it to do something. Now its a glorified coin flip. I sent the pulse shield out against a group of about 24 fighters and of those fighters only 4 of them died today. I had to use rapid fire pulse beams to get rid of the rest.
-Sheraton
P.S. I don't think it was really a nerf since our weakness to kinetic and beam weapons is gone, excepting flux and EMP. Plus we get nice shield regeneration rates out of the deal. So I can deal with the shields. I just feel that taking down the pulse shield down to 50% is a bit much. Before I could reaonsably count on it to destroy fighters or missiles. Now It is a bit underwhelming. Situation listed above is one example.
[ This Message was edited by: Sheraton *XO* on 2013-10-28 22:57 ]
_________________
Twilit Keel Mountains traversed at last we met a dragon who spoke thus: \"Sheraton am I who interprets the signs.\"
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2013-10-28 23:34
Quote:
On 2013-10-28 22:15, Scorched Soul[+R] wrote:
Do the Cooldown enhancements increase the energy drain/ second because if they dont 24% damage + 24% weapon cooldown might as well be 48% weapon damage...
|
It is effectively 48% damage, but you'll be using more energy because you'll be firing faster. Instead of it being huge volley damage, its more damage over time and you're limited by your energy reserves.
_________________
|
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black
Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3823
From: LobsterTown
| Posted: 2013-10-29 02:42
So ships can now fire astronomical amounts of alpha strikes before they run out of energy?
I'm tempted to say this....
Maybe it's time for DS to add additional factors to ships... like weapons' heat and other gadgets like heatsinks and such. You may have the energy to fire... but once your heat goes through the red, BOOM. Your weap explodes and is disabled or destroyed, damaging a bit of your armor and hull in the process.
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....
|
Azreal
Chief Marshal
Joined: March 14, 2004
Posts: 2816
From: United State of Texas, Houston
| Posted: 2013-10-29 06:46
1. Velocity bug still messing with speed.
2. Have had an issue with there being 3 of me in the mv, when clearly DS can only handle one of me at a time.
3. Have had an issue where building a platform did not update the amount of resources in my hold, but when I dropped the remaining on the platform it DID show the proper 2k. Seems to not update client correctly.
_________________
bucket link
|
Boerenkool
Marshal
Joined: December 18, 2007
Posts: 218
| Posted: 2013-10-29 06:50
I really like the seperate garages for each faction!
I'd like to add a future suggestion: allow to sort ships in garage selection not only on ship type like destroyer, cruiser, engineer, but also weapon type like: ships with e-war slots, ships with boms, ships with aura's
_________________
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled, was convincing the world he is a bot
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2013-10-29 07:02
Quote:
On 2013-10-29 02:24, iwancoppa wrote:
Just going to put here that an ICC combat dread at 10gu/s can effectively fire 200 alpha strikes before running out of energy with active shields online.
|
Quote:
First of all, a 24% damage and a 24% rate of fire, while using more energy, is the equivilent of 53% more overall damage over time. If you're using an ICC Ship, for example, energy is not a big problem, thus facilitating a broken damage build.
|
I'm not sure how you made the jump from ICC Combat Dreadnaught to ICC Ship.
The ICC Combat Dreadnaught has such low energy requirements precisely because its using one of the lowest energy cost per damage point weapons in the game. I don't think you could make the same argument for an Assault Dreadnaught.
I also, wouldn't call it "broken", its not overpowered. Railguns are some of the weakest weapons in the game to begin with.
You're also not going to get the full RoF bonus unless each additional shot hits, as opposed to the full 48% damage before, where each shot period was doing flat more damage.
And you will be expending more energy, and some ships are better at this than others. Turns out, those ships have low damage output to begin with.
. You're either consuming way more energy (beams might always hit, but they are energy hogs), or you're risk missing (torps, cannons, missiles, etc.).
This isn't even taken into account on T2 and T3 ships, which have multiple weapon types. So you're going to go 24/24 on half your weapons? Go for it.
Overall, its in player's interest to consider something with more tanigble effects, unless they want the extra bit of DPS.
Maybe we should consider actually encountering broken builds before speculation kills us all?
[ This Message was edited by: Ent on 2013-10-29 07:26 ]
_________________
|
AdmiralChaos
Chief Marshal
Joined: October 08, 2008
Posts: 274
| Posted: 2013-10-29 07:02
Quote:
On 2013-10-29 06:50, Somebody (that I used to know!) wrote:
I really like the seperate garages for each faction!
I'd like to add a future suggestion: allow to sort ships in garage selection not only on ship type like destroyer, cruiser, engineer, but also weapon type like: ships with e-war slots, ships with boms, ships with aura's
|
Along with this.. I would love if my ships stayed in certain spots or I could organize them as I please. (Garage ships)
_________________
I'll chain you to the truth,
For the truth shall set you free,
I'll turn the screws of vengeance,
And bury you with honesty.
I'll make all your dreams come to life,
And slay them as quickly as they came.
|
Talien
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: May 11, 2010
Posts: 2044
From: Michigan
| Posted: 2013-10-29 10:48
Quote:
On 2013-10-29 08:17, Bardiche wrote:
Either way, I beg ICC to reconsider the ICC pulse shield nerf as being negative. With each and every ship having access to that, there was never any need for them to bring ships dedicated to defence, as two ships together brought two pulses of 65% destruction of projectiles. If anything, that would completely negate any volley from UGTO or K'Luth missile ships in tandem with pulse beams, and wiped out most if not all fighters.
The rate of recharge on those devices is high, meaning they could counter every single fighter launch with a pulse wave and cripple the Agincourt using any ship. Now, at least, you have to move within range and you are only likely to cripple half of the Agincourt's offence using any ship, provided you have a second ship to intercept the fighters.
Rather than think about one ship using it, you have to consider fleet engagements of four, five pulse shields blasting out 65% of all missiles and fighters, and then PD going to work on the remainder. With missile volleys of 10 missiles, that means on average between 3 and 4 missiles would meet point defence... completely nulling the volley. And that's just one ship vs one ship. Two waves hitting the same volley lowers that to 2 missiles... and if there were five volleys, three waves makes ~6 missiles for PD to deal with.
|
Actually that's not quite true, it was a 65% chance roll to each individual missile/fighter, and as I pointed out repeatedly it would often be much lower than 65% of a volley, sometimes not affecting any at all. Now with it being stealth nerfed to 50% it's even less worth using.
Compare to Flux Wave and ELF, the faction specials for UGTO and Kluth. First we had Flux Wave buffed to no longer cause FF and ELF getting a boost to energy drain at the same time Pulse Shield had a tradeoff with no longer destroying friendly projectiles but turning into a roll based gadget, now we have EMP (which includes Flux Wave if I'm not mistaken) and ELF causing additional damage to shields, while Pulse Shield gets a straight up nerf.
I can't actually check anything right now because I'm somewhere without my computer and with no internet access presently (I'm posting from a public libary) but as soon as I'm back home I'll be looking at this for myself.
_________________
Adapt or die.
|
Azreal
Chief Marshal
Joined: March 14, 2004
Posts: 2816
From: United State of Texas, Houston
| Posted: 2013-10-29 10:54
Im just gonna say that with 3 ICC at Re yesterday, and at least 2 pulse waves going off, of the 4 racks of 7 bombs I was riding in, so few were hit by the pulse that the shield still went to 3%.
I was suprised, and I actually felt sympathy for the ICC. They did what they should have, and yet, it was literally pointless.
I understand that they can bring many pulse waves to a battle, but perhaps THAT is the issue, and not beating a gadget to death with a nerf bat.
You know, kinda like what we used to say about flux waves?
And then they were limited in number and vessel?
And they havent been an issue since....?
2 cents charged.
_________________
bucket link
|
Bardiche
Chief Marshal
Joined: November 16, 2006
Posts: 1247
| Posted: 2013-10-29 11:17
Quote:
On 2013-10-29 10:48, Talien wrote:
Actually that's not quite true, it was a 65% chance roll to each individual missile/fighter, and as I pointed out repeatedly it would often be much lower than 65% of a volley, sometimes not affecting any at all. Now with it being stealth nerfed to 50% it's even less worth using.
|
If you have a 65% chance of doing something right, and you do it a 100 times, probability states that you will do it right 65% of the time. That's... that's what that number indicates. So if 10 fighters are launched, and pulse wave would destroy one of them 65 out of 100 times, then if it does it 10 times it should destroy 6 or 7 of them purely by going from maths. It could be unlucky and hit none, it could be lucky and hit all.
What you're saying about it "sometimes not affecting any at all" and that "often be much lower than 65% of a volley" is all poppycock because random number generation should have equal odds of picking a number between 0 and 100, and probability states it will pick a number lower than 65 OR 65, 65% of the time. If "often" it would do less than that, you'd be implying the random number generator is biased.
If Flux Wave and ELF were underperforming and Pulse Shield was overperforming, what's wrong with one side getting a buff and the other getting a nerf? As far as I know, pulse shield was never meant to make it so ICC never has to bring escort destroyers into a long-range fight.
Azreal, Pulse also had its range nerfed. The ICC may have just been out of range of the bombs to even affect it. If they were not, unlucky low rolls on their shields are possible. If an AI ICC Transport can block all of the MiRVs fired from a Bomber Dreadnought, it becomes incredulous to believe 2 ICC would have been unable to block a significant count of bombs from a bomber dread. Did you shield them with your body? They should have been wrecking you.
Also, flux waves are present on every UGTO ship and for a Frigate, one Pulse Wave's minimum damage does 10x the minimum damage of a Heavy Particle Cannon. Now THAT is an issue separate from Pulse Shields.
[ This Message was edited by: Bardiche on 2013-10-29 11:18 ]
_________________
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
