GSF Balance according to Verain (long posts!)

[Nemarus]

no new name is required for them, its not a "new mechanic" its adding negative numbers to the already present Shield bleed through stat...

 

Yes, but it's goofy. That's like if Accuracy were always expressed as negative Evasion. Sometimes it makes sense to give separate names to the positive/negative of a spectrum.

[Kuciwalker]

Incidentally, adding a very small amount of bleedthrough could be a way to tweak distortion field.

 

(Though gunships would need a corresponding buff.)

[tunewalker]

Incidentally, adding a very small amount of bleedthrough could be a way to tweak distortion field.

 

(Though gunships would need a corresponding buff.)

 

We already put a way to tweak DF, and personally I like it more

[Kuciwalker]

Yeah but both suggestions are kind of wacky abilities that no other component currently has, whereas shield bleedthrough is a component attribute that already exists and interacts with current mechanics in familiar ways.

[Verain]

I think if disto field loses missile break, it needs no other nerfs. And if it did, shield bleedthrough would be WAY too harsh. The stat only exists on charged plating, and charged plating exists to trivialize the hull damage that bleeds through.

 

 

 

I do think "hardness" is a better name than "negative shield bleedthrough", however.

 

 

I don't think that anything should mitigate the proton or seismic shield piercing. There is a large difference between the VERY scare full shield piercing weapons, and the 8-28% ones- the shield piercing on concussion is mostly free, and is there to guarantee some damage (and it generally still would, even with the changes I outline), but the shield piercing on proton is a pretty big deal- it's why the missile does the damage it does, instead of far more.

 

I also think that shield piercing on a couple things could go up a few percent in that world, which is why one of my possible passive offensive crewman suggestions is a few percent of shield piercing, and part of why I think they could easily buff the bypass copilot ability. The big things to avoid upping it on would be slug railgun and rocket pods- those should pierce shields, sure, but there should be a bit of play in that for those that seek to have a bit of counterplay. I think it's important to have counterplay in the components- not like "immune to railgun", but softer things.

[Kuciwalker]

I don't think that anything should mitigate the proton or seismic shield piercing. There is a large difference between the VERY scare full shield piercing weapons, and the 8-28% ones- the shield piercing on concussion is mostly free, and is there to guarantee some damage (and it generally still would, even with the changes I outline), but the shield piercing on proton is a pretty big deal- it's why the missile does the damage it does, instead of far more.

 

Agreed. Internally they could code it as 200% piercing (sort of like how IIRC Resilience just gives you a 200% resist chance).

[Luneward]

Very nice post, and I agree with almost all of it to some degree or another. Then again, you didn't touch on bombers, which is where we would probably have our most contentious disagreements.

 

Verain Suggests: Selecting distortion gives you a passive buff that increases the lockon of missiles targeting you by 0.25 seconds. That's baseline.

The rightmost tier changes from a missile break into “Distortion Dampening: during distortion field's active ability, you gain evasion based on the targets distance from you, starting at 5% (5000m or less) and ending at 20% (15000m or more)”

 

I really like this idea actually, though unfortunately I don't see it happening purely for code and client/server interaction reasons. At the moment, the actual process of opening fire or initializing a lock is almost completely independent of the status of the target. So the actual calculation of lock time is a set amount handled client side. This increases information the client and server need to exchange and introduces another quirk into the already screwy missile lock process. I suppose it could be piggy backed onto the data that tells the server who you have targeted, but nobody is sure how much room is available in that code for editing.

 

I like the idea, but unfortunately can't come up with any other idea for missile defense that isn't almost as powerful as the missile break effect. Then again, maybe that should be the tradeoff of distortion - more defense against blasters and railguns at the expense of missile defense. If you want missile defense, choose a beefier shield.

[tunewalker]

Very nice post, and I agree with almost all of it to some degree or another. Then again, you didn't touch on bombers, which is where we would probably have our most contentious disagreements.

 

 

 

I really like this idea actually, though unfortunately I don't see it happening purely for code and client/server interaction reasons. At the moment, the actual process of opening fire or initializing a lock is almost completely independent of the status of the target. So the actual calculation of lock time is a set amount handled client side. This increases information the client and server need to exchange and introduces another quirk into the already screwy missile lock process. I suppose it could be piggy backed onto the data that tells the server who you have targeted, but nobody is sure how much room is available in that code for editing.

 

I like the idea, but unfortunately can't come up with any other idea for missile defense that isn't almost as powerful as the missile break effect. Then again, maybe that should be the tradeoff of distortion - more defense against blasters and railguns at the expense of missile defense. If you want missile defense, choose a beefier shield.

 

I laughed at the last line simply because that has been my exact line to verain multiple times especially when his other solution to this has always been "50% less damage from missiles but not damage that can be ignored with Armor pen" which I never took as acceptable....

[Verain]

Well, on live, the disto field missile break is the ONLY thing you get against missiles. Quick charge has the quick charge and the better mobility, directional you can double towards the missiles (and you have a lot of shields), overcharged is a lot of shield, etc.

 

Distortion just has less shield, and evasion, which does NOTHING against a missile....

 

 

So it gets this missile lock. Which is, I think it is fair to say, too powerful.

 

 

The "missiles deal half of their normally calculated damage" thing would, I think, work just fine, but it has some problems. First, there's the timing of buffs and such that is frustrating, second there is the fact that the missiles normally have other tricks they pull, third is the fact that a scout can't happily tank even half a concussion all that well, fourth they definitely need new code.

 

The extra lockon time probably would take something, but it seems like it would give a whole lot back. Missile locks are vetted both client and server side, and the cilent and the server BOTH know who is locking and who is being locked. Obviously it would take code, as it is a new mechanic- but I think it would be worthwhile and interesting.

 

The problem with ANY situation that takes away the missile lock is how big the gameplay shift is, and how that mostly kills distortion. "Good against railguns (except when it isn't), good against blasters (except when it isn't), good against rocket pods (except when it isn't) and terrible against missiles and mines (all times and forever)" is a less than pleasing setup.

 

 

I figure with the "extra time to lock", these craft will continue to FEEL slippery, having more time to get line of sight, and less time happily jousting while sitting on several paladin bubbles.

[Verain]

Very nice post, and I agree with almost all of it to some degree or another. Then again, you didn't touch on bombers, which is where we would probably have our most contentious disagreements.

 

With these changes, bombers would probably be in a better position. One of the problems with playing a bomber is that many of the "generally best" solutions are optimal against you, and that part wouldn't always be true any more. With a bit of shield hardness (negative shield bleedthrough) bombers wouldn't get attritioned quite as hard either.

 

 

The bigger problem is this- the only bomber that I think really needs help right now is the type 1 bomber, and that's mostly to give it a real job. I think that if you buffed the mine explosion radius just a bit, that would get them about where they should be at node defense (but you have to be careful or you step on EMP Field)- and maybe you'd buff ion mine a lot more, that mine seems silly. I sorta think you should just take an 8 second slicer's loop if you get ion mined.

 

But... you've seen my bomber posts. On that topic, I'm still rabble rousing to a degree- I'm not really sure what the "right" answer is. Ultimately the thing where you fly around and drop mines is always going to be really strange, and mostly just useful for node defense. I'd say try to find some fleet support role for type 1 bombers such that they can help out in TDM and play a different role there, while trying to fix some of the serious damage done by the huge nerfs we just saw.

 

is almost completely independent of the status of the target.

 

How so?

 

The engine maneuvers all leave buffs. The buffs all make you immune to locks for their duration. So it already knows how to check a buff on lock.

 

 

So the actual calculation of lock time is a set amount handled client side.

 

A set amount? It varies based on missile. It varies based on pressing 1 in a Pike, Condor, or Comet Breaker. It varies with talents too. No, changing this wouldn't be any harder than a lot of the changes we've seen. This is no manner of constant, it varies second by second in gameplay already. All the data you are worried about passing is already being passed.

Edited July 23, 2014 by Verain

[wvwraith]

I generally agree with all the suggestions. Here's my 2 cents though. I don't mind them dropping slugs a little bit in damage. Recharge should be a little faster than it is currently. That'd be a good exchange. Right now distortion field is basically one of two defensive options against missiles for gunships(if you can't los them atm). If you take that away then there needs to be some sort of defensive buff for gunships. I think feedback shields should reflect missile damage back(far as I know it currently doesn't). I'm all for buffs on plasma slug and new slugs. Could have a shorter range slug that could deal a good amount of damage or something.

[Altheran]

Well, on live, the disto field missile break is the ONLY thing you get against missiles. Quick charge has the quick charge and the better mobility, directional you can double towards the missiles (and you have a lot of shields), overcharged is a lot of shield, etc.

 

Distortion just has less shield, and evasion, which does NOTHING against a missile....

 

But does it actually need to have something against them ?

 

Personally I think does not need any missile protection in any form... even though that at that point, any replacement for the missile break would at least help against them indirectly. So in a way it can't be helped.

(Spoiler to know why I think that way).

 

 

I come to this conclustion when I compare DF to Directionals (which is mostly the second choice on ships who can use DF), in two situations :

- a joust (Who would dare say that Directional are not built for jousts ?) .

- passively.

 

Conditions :

 

Ships are classic Disto Flashfire, with Lightweight and Large, and Directional Flashfire with the same armor and reactor.

For all intent and purposes, both have the same cannons, Cluster Missile and Nadia (+evasion, +shield).

Shield components are like they are now in T2, before any problematic upgrade can be used.

 

 

Joust :

 

We'll assume the accuracy of shots rounded to 100% over the joust (base accuracy rising progressively from under 100% to above 100% - no tracking penalty involved).

 

Because RNG can't be sorted out, the only way to have an idea of who has more chances to win is to calculate EHP.

 

The missile will get through RNG and will be dealt regardless. So the missile's damage will be deduced from available HP before accounting for evasion following this pattern :

 

EHP = ( (1 + Shield.Passive.mod) * 1300 * Active.Shield.mod + 950 - 650 / (1 - Passive.evasion - Active.evasion)

 

Obviously, Active.shield.mod refers to Directional "doubling" the shields (175% actually) and active.evasion to Distortion Field activation.

For both build, formulas are :

 

Directional = ( (1 + 0.4) * 1300 * 1.75 + 950 - 650) / (1 - 0.23) = 4526

Distortion = ( (1 + 0.1) * 1300 + 950 - 650) / (1 - 0.33 - 0.35) = 5406 (+880)

 

The EHP directly gives who is likely to break first, as incoming damage are simultaneous.

 

So, if they use the same cannon, the Disto Flashfire is statistically given as winner of the joust

However it not does not make the Disto FF an automatic winner (RNG), and the margin is actually not really impressive : winning a joust with 900 extra EHP mean -in the case of this Scout- winning with around 300 hull points left only.

 

But whatever if it is significant or not, it means that a Distortion FF makes at least an as good jouster as a Directional FF, which is supposed to be "the jouster".

 

 

Passively :

 

In this case, we can use the same formulas than before (with a cluster missile meshed in) while removing the modifiers due to the powers, but by taking various accuracy values.

 

Usually, we can expect shots not have accuracy above 100% when accounting for both base accuracy and tracking penalties. Similarly, accuracy will rarely go under 60%, for an average I estimate in somewhere in the 70-80%.

To keep the math simple i'll take only two accuracy modifiers, -0% and -40% and consider them as maximas.

 

So :

Directional (@ 100%) = ( (1 + 0.4) * 1300 - 650 + 950) / (1 - 0.23) = 2753

Distortion (@ 100%) = ( (1 + 0.1) * 1300 - 650 + 950) / (1 - 0.33) = 2582 (-171)

 

Directional (@ 60%) = ( (1 + 0.4) * 1300 - 650 + 950) / (1 - 0.23 - 0.40) = 5730

Distortion (@ 60%) = ( (1 + 0.1) * 1300 - 650 + 950) / (1 - 0.33 - 0.40) = 6407 (+678)

 

The difference is even less significant than during the joust, and the favor shifts depending on how accuracy varies.

 

It means that passively DF is also as good as Directional.

 

 

Conclusion :

 

In T2 state, DF and Directionals are pretty much potentially equivalent in their current form, both passively and actively (all utilisation eases aside).

 

So from this, in my opinion DF doesn't need any passive improvement, and the T3 need to be as mild as Directionals to be in line with other components.

 

 

Note :

 

No numbers here, but results are similar with gunship values. (Higher shields and hull and lower evasion) Variance between both builds are lower, though, but conclusion are indentical.

 

 

All considerations aside, from a completely personal point of view, I really don't like how the new DF would act would act towards missiles, in fact.

 

As an extensive user of heavy missiles (Strikes), given the restrictions and tighter launch conditions, I'm not waiting to hear the signal to launch missiles anymore, I use my "internal clock" because the with the client/server desync and the length of the said signal, relying on ears is a huge disadvantage (many launchable missiles would end failing as the firing time window would end before reacting). I assume other players do it too.

(I can't imagine a gunship veteran actually looking at the charge bar, but instinctically knowing when the shot has the right charge. Missiles are not that much different)

 

However having something able to mess with lock time would force the player to listen to the sound again. It would be a significant nerf on performance of heavy missiles for the said player, and not only when facing DF, but also against all ships as that player won't be able to use the the previously mentionned method as it would not be reliable anymore...

 

---

 

As far as go the replacement for the missile break, I think it's a very delicate move : it puts the active evasion at 40% at least.

On a ship capable to achieve 33% of evasion, it makes for 73% evasion, or rather leaves only 27% of shots connecting.

Losing 27% or slightly less accuracy on the attacker side is trivial.

For examples :

- LLC can easily lose 15% as baseline because you are around 4000m. 12% accuracy left. 10 degree off center, and with the tracking penalty upgrade these are 5% of accuracy lost again. 7% of accuracy left. At this point the defending ship is almost immune.

- if Rails are 6-7 degrees off center then it has no chances to hit. Even less degrees are needed to not be able to hit as range increases, and even in the ridiculously small area where you can hit, it becomes lottery.

It's not only LLC or Rails, every cannon can easily lose 20% of accuracy in a trivial way.

 

Unless you improve the accuracy of cannons and alikes by more than the 5% you proposed (which are not really improved since they just move from the crew to baseline according your suggestion), I don't see this upgrade having a much better effect on overall balance than the missile break...

Well it wouldn't unallow heavy missile users from playing anymore, but the effeciency on shots, and so the overall protection it gives would still be unrivalled.

 

Personally I'd go with improving overall accuracy more than that anyway -for various reasons- but I'd still not be fond of this upgrade... I don't like it. Maybe because it's T2 B-version.

Or probably it's just me not fond of the idea that it can reach 40% and above of on-demand effect, which is (almost) as huge as DCDs in the ground game...

 

... actually the more I think of it as something like the ground game's Deflection, the more I think it would be a bad idea to strengthen the effect more than its current form.

 

 

In the other hand, I do not have many alternatives in replacement for the missile break, though.

 

Maybe something that turns-off the Shield Regen delay during the duration. The risk here is that it may overide the interest given to Shield Projector which has the same active regen, and to some extent maybe Quick-charge too which is barely above.

In the same lines, if the above is too strong, it could give 50% of "Shield recently used regen rate" for the duration.

 

But in a way those are improving on-demand protection which is already top notch...

 

So... why not giving 10 Engine points on activation ? I thought of 20, but it reminded me a bit S2E converter.

Other than this I do not have any "innovant" idea that would not copy an other component's upgrade (10% passive regen...)

 

*Sigh* This component is a hell to balance.

[Verain]

You think disto doesn't need to have anything against missiles. You're ok with just nerfing it straight up.

 

 

I'm not. I think that would be a ludicrous nerf, and would make it unplayable. It would send the meta spiraling, and trashcan the type 1 gunship and all scouts. The type 1 gunship would need directional shields or something to compensate.

 

Taking a component from generally best to unarguably bad is not ok, nor was it my intention.

[Verain]

On a ship capable to achieve 33% of evasion, it makes for 73% evasion, or rather leaves only 27% of shots connecting.

 

We all know evasion is a really good stat. My reasoning behind a talent that offers 5-20% boost to that is that the distortion field needs a choice that stands opposite the extra three seconds, which is a 50% boost. Given that the missile thing is baseline in that idea, the talent can't help with missiles anymore, and it needs to represent a choice versus the now actually decent 9 second disto.

 

So yes, a 33% base evasion has 68% during cooldowns. You can't really take 100 and subtract that 68 to get 32 though- in practice you can have more than 100, or less, and with that much evasion it makes your tanking VERY swingy. If you DID start with 32% chance to be hit, losing 5% chance to be hit is a massive 15% boost in survival- still worse than the 3 extra seconds, which people forget how good that is because no one takes it on live.

 

Versus a greater ranged opponent it's a very good defense, however.

 

 

Is the number too much? Maybe a bit, yea. I chose rounder numbers. Ultimately, it doesn't matter if hitting a guy with distortion up is difficult. It's pretty hard on live, and it's ok if, in exchange for removing a missile lock, it becomes a bit stronger.

 

Now, your thing where you start stacking all the subtractions- "well, he's off center, and your accuracy is poor, and this, and that"- is actually not that bad of a model. But neither is the possibility that you have wingman, or the possibility that you have combat command, or something else.

 

Is evasion too good now? Will it be too good in this?

 

 

I have ideas in there for some stuff that would ignore evasion or otherwise serve as a way around it. More importantly, if you are running any of the other shields, you would have a good defense that a disto guy doesn't.

 

...but MOST importantly, these changes help concussions and ions and even protons and thermites quite a bit. Without disto shield break, who cares if they can tank a bit better by whatever percent they have to run from missiles.

 

 

And that would be a huge, and great change.

[Luneward]

You think disto doesn't need to have anything against missiles. You're ok with just nerfing it straight up.

 

 

I'm not. I think that would be a ludicrous nerf, and would make it unplayable. It would send the meta spiraling, and trashcan the type 1 gunship and all scouts. The type 1 gunship would need directional shields or something to compensate.

 

Any ship that can field distro shield has plenty of defense against missiles. It's called getting the f*** out of there. Distro field already offers the highest increase in effective health against standard fire for a ship due to the exponential increasing benefits of stacking evasion. Any ship that can mount distro can either outmaneuver or out-range a craft that can attempt to establish a lock on them. Granting some other benefit to the t3 upgrade (effectiveness increase?) would bring distro back in line with the other shields since using the duration increase already makes it fairly equal to a quick charge or directional shield. This would probably go hand in hand with the slight decrease in cluster damage that Dementia thought would be beneficial since they have kind of an absurd ease of use to damage ratio.

 

So yes, I would be perfectly fine with this kind of nerf to distro field. Heaven forfend the meta is shaken up a little bit and you might actually start to see t2 scouts and t3 gunships that actually dare to use a different shield since it isn't mathematically necessary to stick to one type any more. Do you remember the old meta? Distro field on active mode used to make scouts nearly impossible to hit, so almost everyone took the upgrade that doubled the active duration. Once the nerf to the passive and active effects happened scouts died a bit more often, but it was still a near required component that was better than the others, and they adapted quite well to that - they just changed from one flavor of overpowered upgrade to the other flavor that wasn't quite as powerful at the time.

Edited July 24, 2014 by Luneward

[Mathemagica]

1a- “Miss” text when you fire a shot at an opponent and the combat table says it is a miss or evade.

 

It might have been said before, but I didn't check the whole thread. If you fire at a target and don't 'manually miss', an additional circle appears within your targeting circle. Thus, if you miss a target because of evasion/accuracy, you will see this additional circle but no damage number. I don't know about you, but I can work with that.

 

Overall, good post. But I have my doubts about your changes to Plasma Railgun being enough. Personally, I'd love to see the burn damage to be applied directly to hull.

Edited July 24, 2014 by Mathemagica

[Verain]

Any ship that can field distro shield has plenty of defense against missiles. It's called getting the f*** out of there.

 

Look, I agree with the fact that the disto field is too good on live. If you haven't noticed, I spent a decent amount of time coming up with a change that I think would be reasonable.

 

But no, you don't have a defense called "getting out of there". You see, EVERY ship has that defense, but then they also have some OTHER defense too. Like, you could double directional, or press quick charge, or whatever. The few shield components that don't actually boost your defenses directly at least don't also reduce your shielding. Without the missile lock break, distortion field ships get hurt by missiles more than any other shield type.

 

 

I'm sure that's why they have it.

 

 

If you want to assert that every scout and two of the three gunships are SO GOOD that they just don't need a missile break at all, I think I can't really argue with you. You must really hate the meta right now, and I'm surprised you aren't making a bunch of threads about it.

 

Distro field already offers the highest increase in effective health against standard fire for a ship due to the exponential increasing benefits of stacking evasion

 

While offering nothing versus aoe damage and reducing shield magnitude. Except for the lock break, it's bad against missiles (with the lock break it trivializes missiles). If you are just trying to make the component into a garbage can, whatever, go make a thread for that.

 

 

 

Any ship that can mount distro can either outmaneuver or out-range a craft that can attempt to establish a lock on them.

 

Gunships can't outrun strikes or scouts. They cannot "outmaneuver or out-range". In fact, they mostly need that missile lock break- the one gunship that cannot use it is poor enough that it isn't in real games, in part because of that.

 

 

The changes to distortion in this thread are a very big nerf. You seem to want the component to be made worse, to be wrong, and the ships using it to not be playable. That isn't my goal. I think that the disto lock break is too strong, but it IS SUPPOSED TO OFFER DEFENSE AGAINST MISSILES. You can read that as the dev intent, because CURRENTLY IT MAKES MISSILES JUST NOT WORK.

 

I think there's a few ways you could make it weaker versus missiles. You could, for instance, increase the magnitude and duration of the evasion buff (say it lasts 10 seconds baseline), and increase the cooldown (say, to thirty seconds). That would really hurt its ability to break missiles. You could make it reduce missile damage (not worthless damage reduction that missiles just ignore, but a fresh mechanic. You could make it make missiles take a bit longer to lock. You could drop the missile break but buff the distortion field substantially against blasters and railguns, turning it into something like a charged plating- absurdly good against some weapons, totally worthless against others.

 

 

I suggested one that sounded reasonable and fair. If you just want to nerf the living crap out of the move, you're probably some kind of hater.

 

 

 

Do you remember the old meta? Distro field on active mode used to make scouts nearly impossible to hit, so almost everyone took the upgrade that doubled the active duration.

 

Actually, no they didn't. I always ran missile lock break and would simply not plan on jousting people with the six second one with my three second one. I would, in fact, hammer them with clusters.

 

And they were rare. Most players took the missile break. Even the passive was better back then too.

 

 

 

 

So, I tried to craft suggestions that would get everyone playing everything. Taking a bit longer to lock on is, I think, in line with that- certainly such a suggestion wouldn't allow the jousting / timed immunity junk that I see almost stationary scouts do now, with far more success than, IMO, such a strat deserves.

 

 

 

I just don't think it's as mandatory. I think any change that eliminates the missile break risks being an overnerf- and one that JUST does that sure as heck is.

[Verain]

It might have been said before, but I didn't check the whole thread. If you fire at a target and don't 'manually miss', an additional circle appears within your targeting circle.

 

No, that's unrelated.

 

When you have your cursor aimed at the reticule, the cursor changes slightly. This is the game's way of telling you that such a shot should roll on the combat table. This is helpful, but it doesn't do what you think.

 

Thus, if you miss a target because of evasion/accuracy, you will see this additional circle but no damage number. I don't know about you, but I can work with that.

 

That's false. You can, for instance, click your mouse button while out of the reticule and then move it into the reticule, and you won't be sure. You can have VERY little time to mouse and target. Or you can be in one of the rare situations where you should'n't aim directly at the reticule.

 

None of that is what I want. What we have is an indicator that tells you whether you are CURRENTLY aimed at the target, but that doesn't give you the feedback as to whether you also clicked correctly or not.

 

Overall, good post. But I have my doubts about your changes to Plasma Railgun being enough. Personally, I'd love to see the burn damage to be applied directly to hull.

 

Remember that there are also nerfs to slug in there. The accuracy is the biggest problem plasma has. You are correct that slug will still be better after the change, overall, by a bit. My goal was not to make any components "wrong". I wasn't trying to make suggestions that would take a component we all play and like and turn it to crap.

 

Dealing 1092 (average) damage directly to hull from EVERY plasma shot would be VASTLY better than slug on many targets. You might not want it versus DR targets, but dude, that is a hell of a lot of shield piercing. Again, that would be an average of 936 to shield (or hull), then 1092 burn damage (as 156 per second on average) over seven seconds. That seems very impactful. I just wanted plasma to have a use!

[tunewalker]

I have a secondary solution, one that may be a bit easier to implement.

With the removal of the missile break increase the base shields of Disto to -10% the same as the suggested Quick charge shields and make the right one a 15% buff to evasion while the ability is active... while I love the idea of the greater evasion the farther away the opponent is I don't see a mechanic like that in game right now so it maybe difficult for the devs to do. For a straight buff to evasion would be easier, and a straight buff to the strength of the shields also solves in part what Verain you are asking for as the "shield strength" now preforms a more similar level to other "specialized" shields of a similar level like the quick charge win win and likely easier to implement...

[Verain]

I have a secondary solution, one that may be a bit easier to implement.

 

Also conveniently terrible against missiles.

 

If the disto doesn't offer some missile defense, I don't personally want the change. It's a bad change IMO.

 

With the removal of the missile break increase the base shields of Disto to -10% the same as the suggested Quick charge shields

 

But quick charge shields can heal for 500+ shields, a serious help versus a missile. Quick charge shields also aide mobility greatly, and distortion does not.

 

and make the right one a 15% buff to evasion while the ability is active

 

I mean, that takes it back to essentially unhittable.

 

... while I love the idea of the greater evasion the farther away the opponent is I don't see a mechanic like that in game right now

 

You understand that literally every blaster and railgun loses distance with a sliding scale, linearly, right? Ex: quad laser at 500m has an accuracy when kitted out of 116%, and at 3000m has an accuracy of 101%. Every time you click your fire mouse button, it extrapolates a base accuracy, and the distance part of that is, in this case, represented by:

 

(for X<500)

Accuracy = 116

(for X>=500 to X<=3000)

Accuracy = 116 - 15*(X-500)/2500

 

This is already in game- with multiple breakpoints. For railguns too.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm dubious of any change that would take away the defense versus missiles. Right now it's the best shield versus missiles- post change, it either should be the best shield versus missiles, or very much in the running.

 

 

If you make it the WORST versus missiles? Screw that noise.

[Mathemagica]

Dealing 1092 (average) damage directly to hull from EVERY plasma shot would be VASTLY better than slug on many targets. You might not want it versus DR targets, but dude, that is a hell of a lot of shield piercing. Again, that would be an average of 936 to shield (or hull), then 1092 burn damage (as 156 per second on average) over seven seconds. That seems very impactful. I just wanted plasma to have a use!

 

Wouldn't it be neat, if Slug and Plasma would be powerful against different types of targets? That would make Slug/Plasma an interesting combination on T1 and T2 Gunships. Plasmas damage would have to be corrected for sure. You say your suggestion would leave Slug as slightly superior to Plasma. I'd like to reach the point where they are 'equal' in some definition of the word. One way would be to make them superior to different types of targets, which is what my idea is aiming for.

 

 

Thanks for the info on the targeting circle. It seems that this circle doesn't really fulfills its purpose then, since we have to be overshooting at large angles.

Edited July 24, 2014 by Mathemagica

[tunewalker]

Also conveniently terrible against missiles.

 

If the disto doesn't offer some missile defense, I don't personally want the change. It's a bad change IMO.

 

 

 

But quick charge shields can heal for 500+ shields, a serious help versus a missile. Quick charge shields also aide mobility greatly, and distortion does not.

 

 

 

I mean, that takes it back to essentially unhittable.

 

 

 

You understand that literally every blaster and railgun loses distance with a sliding scale, linearly, right? Ex: quad laser at 500m has an accuracy when kitted out of 116%, and at 3000m has an accuracy of 101%. Every time you click your fire mouse button, it extrapolates a base accuracy, and the distance part of that is, in this case, represented by:

 

(for X<500)

Accuracy = 116

(for X>=500 to X<=3000)

Accuracy = 116 - 15*(X-500)/2500

 

This is already in game- with multiple breakpoints. For railguns too.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm dubious of any change that would take away the defense versus missiles. Right now it's the best shield versus missiles- post change, it either should be the best shield versus missiles, or very much in the running.

 

 

If you make it the WORST versus missiles? Screw that noise.

 

but in the state I showed Quick charge would still be worse against all others would it not. Would you prefer it had 0 reduction in shield strength returning shields like Feed back and Directional the like into uselessness. If disto remains the best average against blasters while still equaling the missile defense of other shields, then you have done nothing to actually change the meta as far as that shield is concerned. Every ship that has it still has 0 choice it must still choose Disto or be considered useless....

 

Accuracy and evasion are not 1 and the same. Of course I realize it is in place for accuracy, but it has never been in place for Evasion I am not sure we can count them one and the same. If the devs can then yes they should use your idea, but I doubt they have the ability to do so....

 

You know as well as I do, the Button press shield regen on quick charge is its response to EVERYTHING not just missiles and that button press is on average much weaker then the evasion granted by the button press of disto. Its defense against missiles would be the same as Directionals... the strength of the shield itself, unlike Directional though, it would be slightly weaker to missiles but on average the increase in shield is also an increase to survivability against blasters and railguns and even some mines....

 

I was trying to find a balance, the devs may have a difficulty implementing what you are talking about which is why some people were suggestin other things. This was a way to bridge that gap. I don't want Disto to be overly weak against missiles either, and your number 1 complaint I hear from you over and over again is about how other shields have beefier shields to soak up some of those missiles. This was an attempt to appease to that.

 

The only defense other shields have is the strength of their shields. Feedback does nothing against missiles except be as strong as it is, its active does nothing against them.. Quick charge has a button to instantly recharge shields but that isn't missile exclusive. Directionals can be double forward or double back, again not missile exclusive and comes with its own built in weakness. Sheidl to engine converter again SACRIFICES all defense for speed no missile defense..... Fortress shield has "missile defense" in terms of sheer shield strength, but again we both know the cost that one has...... Shield projector has shields as weak as Disto, and in my suggestion weaker, its strength is a group buff and ultimately gets extremely little in terms of missile defense, it would ultimately have worse "missile defense" then if Disto had my suggestion.....

 

Disto's active is on average better then any other shields active against blasters and rails we know this, if we make its active also better or equal against missiles then the other shields are of no use and the meta doesn't change. I like your idea but you know as well as I do there is no mechanic in the game like it at the moment. That makes it difficult to implement.....

 

 

I am going to compare disto and quick charge with my suggestion cus this is the closest we are going to get with these 2.....

 

 

Disto strength Passive evasion increase

 

Quick charge strength Shield regen engine regen

 

I would call these things nearly equal though honestly I might give the advantage to Quick charge here simply for the extra movement speed, but this is definitely player preference as far as I can tell....

 

Disto active strength +50% evasion for 6 seconds or +35% evasion for 9 seconds

vs

Quick charge (on scout is only place this will matter) 35% instantly regened (note it starts out at 30% but the first upgrade increases by 6% I am rounding for this to make it easier on myself) 1300 base shields......= 455 (this is half a cluster missile double volley or 1 shot of a heavy laser)

 

Overall assessment: on average Disto will be significantly better against basters and railguns then Quick charge, but quick charge will move faster and it has enough to eat half more of a missile then disto, again HALF more of a missile, that's not much more defense for the huge sacrifice in the average blaster and Railgun defenses, BUT when combined with the extra speed it is likely equal.

 

Now if we brought Disto up to 0% reduction we would be back at square 1 why choose anything other then disto... sure it cant dodge missiles or slow them down or anything but neither can anything else... its on average best against blasters and Rails, but just as good against missiles as everything else, why choose it.

 

LIke I said I like your idea, but I think you are giving the devs to much credit to think they can easily implement something like that. If they could they would.....

 

 

Edit: if you want to start that crap about how "disto is supposed to be good against missiles why else would they put the break in there" then I could simply answer with "well clearly Disto is supposed to be the best shield against everything so why change it" if it was meant to be the best against missiles then the Missile break wouldn't be a CHOICE as it stands you don't HAVE to take the missile break, the missile break is a CHOICE a choice we are forced into because every one knows the other one is sub par. The shields base design is not designed around missiles. All equipments base design is visible from its starting stats not its upgraded stats (maybe 1 or 2 upgrades since they are cheap and mandatory, the moment you get out of mandatory upgrades then not EVERY one is SUPPOSED to take that option thus its base design isn't around those options those are OPTIONAL designs, but some of those Optional designs have become so good they over right the original design).... that's where we see the intent of the item... the devs I doubt balance everything with the assumption everyone in every match is flying 100% mastered ships... equipment needs to be useable for its intended purpose early on.... just like the devs have talked about how they don't like how much burst TT is getting, an amount its achieving thanks to the final tier in its tree..... Its intended purpose was to make things easier to hit the rest was just icing on the cake to reward players that maxed it out... its just the icing went to far.... AkA buff the Cake... Nerf the ICING

Edited July 24, 2014 by tunewalker

[Verain]

but in the state I showed Quick charge would still be worse against all others would it not.

 

Well, no, the selling point of quick charge is the extra engine powers. And it wouldn't be worse than others- quick charge is currently moderately worse than directional in the opinion of most good players (not all). Both are inferior to disto, because disto breaks missiles AND blah blah effective health.

 

Would you prefer it had 0 reduction in shield strength returning shields like Feed back and Directional the like into uselessness.

 

Feedback is -0, but directional is +10%. Much more importantly, directional can be doubled in a direction, which is a huge defense against everything- and the proposed directional would have a lot of shield hardness too.

 

Feedback, you'll notice, is an offensive trick. You'll also note that on live, it is better against missiles than distortion, until disto gets the break.

 

If disto remains the best average against blasters while still equaling the missile defense of other shields, then you have done nothing to actually change the meta as far as that shield is concerned.

 

...unless you literally forget to read everything I wrote about directional, shield projector, overcharged, and quick charge shield, AND you forget the massive engine regen boost that quick charge gains.

 

 

Accuracy and evasion are not 1 and the same.

 

Sure they are. Evasion is negative accuracy, it's simple. If I have 116% chance to hit you and you have 26% evasion, my chance to hit you is 116-26=90%. I then roll between 0 and 100, and if I roll 90 or below, I hit you.

 

What doesn't happen: I don't roll between 0 and 100, and if I get below 116, goto step 2. Step 2: Roll between 0 and 100, and if I roll 26 or lower, miss.

 

In the first case, I take my 116 minus 26 and end up with a 90% chance of hitting you. In the second case, which is NOT what happens, I would have a 74% hit chance.

 

but I doubt they have the ability to do so....

 

It wasn't a precondition, but every thing that I put down in my section 2 already exists in game (possible exception: max snare magnitude). We know we can change missile lock on times because we have talents that do it. We know we can scale hit smoothly with accuracy because the combat system already does that.

 

That doesn't mean that they will implement any of those changes- but they absolutely could. They use the existing system that 100%.

 

You know as well as I do, the Button press shield regen on quick charge is its response to EVERYTHING not just missiles and that button press is on average much weaker then the evasion granted by the button press of disto.

 

Of course. And the ability to scoot around quickly something disto users lack. And the ability to press F2 and blast back to full shield strength in seconds is something disto users lack.

 

Quick charge beats the snot out of distortion in many ways. What it isn't, is better on average. Which is why my post suggests a substantial nerf to disto and a buff to QCC. But that's not good enough for you- you want the move to be really and truly terrible against missiles, because you hate scouts.

 

Its defense against missiles would be the same as Directionals

 

That's laughable. On live, directional is much better than distortion against missiles... not counting the break.

 

You can push double directional, and on top of that you have a 10% stronger shield from a talent. While not exceptional, you'll also get your shields regenerating much quicker with directional. Even if the penalty to shield strength was removed, directionals remain far more effective versus any missile actually connecting with you.

 

So if you take away the insta-break, you need to add something else, unless your goal is to make anyone taking distortion missilebait. I wrote my post with the goal of making missiles more effective and not trivialized by it. You write your posts with the intention of making it terrible against missiles. That's why we have different suggestions.

 

I was trying to find a balance, the devs may have a difficulty implementing what you are talking about which is why some people were suggestin other things

 

Funny that none of those suggestions result in anything but distortion being crap against missiles. That's what I think is motivating those, not some concern over whether the devs can do things that the game engine is already doing for them.

 

The only defense other shields have is the strength of their shields. Feedback does nothing against missiles except be as strong as it is, its active does nothing against them

 

And at least it has a full strength shield. Also? Who cares if feedback isn't the best defense. You don't take feedback for its defensive capabilities, you take it because it has reflective damage. Feedback and Repair Probe aren't very relevant to this, AND they aren't really often a choice. If someone is worried about their missile defense, of course they shouldn't take the component that turns their shield into a weapon. That's a repurposing of a role of that button, and you don't just take that by accident. Feedback shield is also much weaker against missiles than directional, or fortress, and what of it?

 

Comparing apples to apples is comparing shields chosen for defensive purposes with other shields available in competition. It is reasonable to discuss distortion, quick charge, shield projector, and directional for sure on this note!

 

 

Sheidl to engine converter again SACRIFICES all defense for speed no missile defense

 

SEC gives a +25% passive to shields, AND lets you boost forever, which is a massive boost versus missiles.

 

The fact that the other shield defensive options are effective against missiles AND X is not relevant. Disto trades off shield strength in exchange for EVASION.

 

So you can double back versus a blaster or missile. You can quick charge versus a blaster or missile. You can boost versus a blaster or missile (QCC/SEC), and you can +25% passive versus a blaster or missile. Can you DODGE a blaster? Sure. Can you DODGE a missile?

 

...no.

 

 

Hence, it needs something against missiles.

 

LIke I said I like your idea, but I think you are giving the devs to much credit to think they can easily implement something like that. If they could they would.....

 

Like three or four times you've implied it is impossible for devs to use existing mechanics in the same way that they already exist in game. They've added all kinds of crazy stuff and even changed their aoe code JUST TO NERF MINES, they could easily do this.

 

 

Do they want to? I dunno. I hope that these suggestions are at least talked about, though. They seem to be really popular in this thread, and they are meant to be conservative but impactful.

Edited July 24, 2014 by Verain

[tunewalker]

Ok verain... calm your ****... I don't hate scouts... I don't want Disto to be OMG terrible... that wasn't the intent. the intent was to find a balance. Adding - Sheild pierce to a shield doenst help it a tremendous amount against missiles. It helps a little yes but not a tremendous amount. Are you saying scouts and GS should still always take Disto if that's the case then the Disto nerf wouldn't be enough.

 

If we assume people take and hand half as is intended by the devs (because we know the devs actually WANT us to choose between the left and right upgrade) then half of the Disto's currently have 0 defense against missiles.... and in fact are worse then all others against them while the other half are best....

 

I am telling you the darned truth when it comes to my intent. I am trying to find a way to appease the masses. One that "nerfs/buffs" Disto to where missiles are no longer useless but in a way we have actually seen implemented. We have never seen EVASION based on range implemented Accuracy is there and if they can do so great, but we haven't seen them do it yet.... We haven't seen them implement something on a player as a defensive technique to increase Missile lock times, we also have not seen a OCD reduce such times, all times for reduction are passive, thus I just assume they cant or it would be difficult for what ever reason. I am just trying to find a middle ground. I asked if you thought 0 loss in shields was reasonable because it was a serious question.....you know me better then this man....

 

But with that how many do expect would actually take anything other then Disto..... its supposed to be a choice, with strengths and weaknesses not mandatory cus its still the best against all.....

 

Yes quick charge gets extra speed and regen but Disto gets passive evasion. Yes it has a small shield heal but Disto gets a great on use laser and railgun average defensive buff.

 

Work with me here instead of trying to attack me man I start maving your direction you start heading mine we can find a balance that few will whine about. Yes I have doubt in the devs abilities, so is it bad to try to find a middle ground... youshould know me better then to just sit there and go "I hate scouts, or I hate gunships and just want to delete them" that's not what I am trying to do.... and if DF is the "this ship is deleted" then that means something else is either wrong with DF being mandatory or something needs to be done to help that ship WITHOUT DF....

 

I was under the impression these changes were supposed to make it OK for Flashfires to choose Directional instead of DF, if not then whats the point besides "buffing strkes.... oh but the best shields in the game are still DF" I would feel like the job is half done man...

 

Edit: oh and both Directional and DF have the same "base regen" though admittedly Directionals last upgrad can either extra regen (which next to no one takes cus that actually needs a buff) or reduced regen delay which you could interpret as better regen

 

edit:

The fact that the other shield defensive options are effective against missiles AND X is not relevant.

 

its entirely relavent, unless you want to make the evasion on average as good as the defenses of other shields. Directionals are great when double what ever but come with the built in weakness of cant having both side doubled at the same time, when one side is double the other side is weakened. This causes many blind sides to happen. So if on average Distortion is better then everything in Blaster and Rail defenses to make its OVERALL defenses equal it needs to sacrifice else where. Thus other shields being their defense against EVERYTHING is relevant it gives a base overall defense to measure up to... if Disto beats it in one avenue it must be weaker in another if not then the shield is not balanced.

Edited July 24, 2014 by tunewalker

[Kuciwalker]

Actually, no they didn't. I always ran missile lock break and would simply not plan on jousting people with the six second one with my three second one. I would, in fact, hammer them with clusters.

 

And they were rare. Most players took the missile break. Even the passive was better back then too.

 

Uh, really? Back in the days of ion love tap the +3s was way more important than the missile break.