Jump to content

Incoming pvp changes


JohnnyTazer

Recommended Posts

Spreezy just did an interview with entropy. YouTube video will be up tomorrow he said. Some notes to incoming pvp changes..

 

- Radar lock range won't be tied to cores. A L radar will lock all cores equal distance as base.

- Cross section will take into account hit chance. To what degree we do not know.

- Choices on what elements you put on will matter. Entropy said "L weapons wont go on xs cores anymore, but to what degree we dont know, as in If you can use them still on a S or M core, but definitely not on XS core.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JohnnyTazer said:

Spreezy just did an interview with entropy. YouTube video will be up tomorrow he said. Some notes to incoming pvp changes..

 

- Radar lock range won't be tied to cores. A L radar will lock all cores equal distance as base.

- Cross section will take into account hit chance. To what degree we do not know.

- Choices on what elements you put on will matter. Entropy said "L weapons wont go on xs cores anymore, but to what degree we dont know, as in If you can use them still on a S or M core, but definitely not on XS core.

 

Death to cube meta.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you are in a L core you can now lock an XS core at same distance, provided you both have the same size radar and share same skills.  This will keep the L radar's to remain meta for all cores still.  These changes will be a big factor moving forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/30/2020 at 11:46 AM, JohnnyTazer said:

- Radar lock range won't be tied to cores. A L radar will lock all cores equal distance as base.

Silly idea, a small object should be less easy to lock, regardless of radar size. The radar size should maybe increase the lock chance/time, have a longer lock range and in return require more power (once introduced). You also mentioned just now that they said that this depends on both having the same radar.. How woudl the size of my radar affect your ability to lock me.. That is such sideways thinking..

 

Quote

- Cross section will take into account hit chance. To what degree we do not know.

Artificial balance idea unless the lock chance actually changes if the relative position and orientation is taken into account by this.

 

 

Quote

- Choices on what elements you put on will matter. Entropy said "L weapons wont go on xs cores anymore, but to what degree we dont know, as in If you can use them still on a S or M core, but definitely not on XS core.

Another short sighted and knee jerk "solution"

 

Cores should have a power capacity, weapons/shields/engines/radar/countermeasures should require power. You can fit whatever as long as it stays within the power capacity of the core. You fit large weapons, no or minimal shields or only a small radar operating a limited capacity so you need to get close which opens you up to attack. You may be able to add power by adding batteries but they have limited use and will impact mass and agility with it.

 

 

Once more, NQ shows their inability to be creative and really come up with good ideas as well as being oblivious to anything the community may discuss suggest. If these things are al they can come up with after nearly a year since they introduces PVP.. I don't know but it's meager at best..

 

 

EDIT: Posted update on this further down after hearing what was actually said and frankly, it's not that bad and actually pretty decent as far as ideas go.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, blazemonger said:

Silly idea, a small object should be less easy to lock, regardless of radar size. The radar size should maybe increase the lock chance/time, have a longer lock range and in return require more power (once introduced). You also mentioned just now that they said that this depends on both having the same radar.. How woudl the size of my radar affect your ability to lock me.. That is such sideways thinking..

 

Artificial balance idea unless the lock chance actually changes if the relative position and orientation is taken into account by this.

 

 

Another short sighted and knee jerk "solution"

 

Cores should have a power capacity, weapons/shields/engines/radar/countermeasures should require power. You can fit whatever as long as it stays within the power capacity of the core. You fit large weapons, no or minimal shields or only a smal radar operating a limited capacity so you need to get close which opens you up to attack. You may be able to add power by adding bateries but they have limited use and will impact mass and agility with it.

 

 

Once more, NQ shows their inability to be creative and really come up with good ideas as well as being oblivious to anything the community may discuss suggest. If these things are al they can come up with after nearly a year since they introduces PVP.. I don't know but it's meager at best..

 

I mean, he was a bit vague on how they would make us make choices on what elements to put down, but in the end not having L guns on XS core is whatever to me.  I mean, you cant fit Dreadnought guns on a frigate in eve.  They can make it so no matter what, you couldn't even fit 1 L gun on an XS cause of "power" and that sounds like what he means.  Its not completely restricting it per se, but that with new possible power restrictions 1 wont even fit.  And as I said, no one in EvE has EVER complained that a frigate cant put on battleship sized guns.  So I think youre doing a bit knee jerk here.  I'd like to see more info when these changes actually come to pass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, blazemonger said:

How woudl the size of my radar affect your ability to lock me.. That is such sideways thinking

To be fair there is some realism to this. If you're own systems are sending out a lot of energy trying to find objects, an opposing craft could easily lock onto that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Noddles said:

To be fair there is some realism to this. If you're own systems are sending out a lot of energy trying to find objects, an opposing craft could easily lock onto that.

You can't lock onto a signal like that, you could triangulate position with multiple ships maybe, but you can't say "he is there" based on just your opponents radar signal, that is not how that works.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, blazemonger said:

You can't lock onto a signal like that, you could triangulate position with multiple ships maybe, but you can't say "he is there" based on just your opponents radar signal, that is not how that works.

 

You actually can. Most modern aircraft do it with some accuracy. It gets even easier once youve been locked. Its not that far of a jump to assume 200 years in the future we've gotten slightly better at understanding radiowaves. Not to mention we're in space. There's a lot less background noise in space than there would be in atmosphere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<rotfl>

"We unify radar range."  -  so xs core will have the same locking range as L core.
"We limit weapons by core size" - so xs core won't be able to have L weapons. 

Wtf. If they remove locking range between xs and l core - there is NO F...ING difference between XS and L core in itself. You can have exactly the same cross-section, even practically the same weight of the ship on XS as on L core too.... 
Its like person A - we will solve it that way. Person B - no, we will solve it that way. Person three-  lets do radar based on cross-section. Lets do all three cause why not?! xD

New meta - cube with L core instead of XS. Actually for pirates it could also be box, they will be able to put in more gold, fuel and engines in. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a couple questions for you fellow pvpers as I've 0 experience of pvp in DU: can you explain me how locking and shooting actually works? I mean, when you shoot, what are you actually shooting at? The core? The cockpit? Or can you choose to target a specific element?

When I shoot does my projectile land exactly on the first object between my gun and his target or is there some kind of hit chance or inaccuracy involved?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Fra119 said:

I have a couple questions for you fellow pvpers as I've 0 experience of pvp in DU: can you explain me how locking and shooting actually works? I mean, when you shoot, what are you actually shooting at? The core? The cockpit? Or can you choose to target a specific element?

When I shoot does my projectile land exactly on the first object between my gun and his target or is there some kind of hit chance or inaccuracy involved?

 

 

 

Once a target is in your lock range, you "identify it". This can take some time.  If the target leaves the range it cancels the lock and will have to re-identify (when in range).  Once you are in range, the gunner can choose to shoot, but there is a yellowish bar that indicates if the guns are facing the target, think of it is accuracy, and this is dictated by skills and base "cone" of said weapons.  The weapons also have a range that need to be within.  This can be modified thru ammo and talents.  If the guns are aimed at the target, and in range, then you get a "hit" and its RNG whether its voxels, and/or elements.  If you destroy an element it gives you a notification in the bottom right of the gunner seat.  I know watching youtube videos of the pvp and the sound of it might seem rather bland, but its actually pretty exciting, to me at least (yes i know it needs crazy amount of work to get better) but the "crew aspect" i thoroughly enjoy.  Also, people fail to realize that the gunner plays a major role in the engagement not just "sit there and click".  As I am usually the pilot for my group, I rely on the gunner for things like speed of enemy ship, and if/when he is in range/has good accuracy to shoot.  Also chosing good time times when to reload, or telling my gunner to "stop shooting" because i have to do major evasive manuevers and therefore wont be pointed at the enemy ship.  Gunner has to also keep an eye on mulitple enemy ships as I can really only focus on one to get the best chance to maintain trajectory so our guns hit them.  Nothing is worse then wasted ammo and "miss" over and over.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watched the interview (should have done so before commenting I guess)

 

The same lock range as Entropy explained it actually made sense 

It certainly sounded to me, besides limiting what weapon size you can fit, like NQ is looking to bring in something like power management to have players make choices about what they can or want to fit which is good.

 

I really liked how Entropy shot down the suggestion of a player getting up to speed by being smart and using the full range of the safezone as being OP (it's not and his answer was excellent). I thought Speeezy got a bit salty as his idea was shot down and started to argue frankly very tearful arguments. He lost composure as an interviewer and started arguing personal pet peeves unfortunately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, blazemonger said:

Watched the interview (should have done so before commenting I guess)

 

The same lock range as Entropy explained it actually made sense 

It certainly sounded to me, besides limiting what weapon size you can fit, like NQ is looking to bring in something like power management to have players make choices about what they can or want to fit which is good.

 

I really liked how Entropy shot down the suggestion of a player getting up to speed by being smart and using the full range of the safezone as being OP (it's not and his answer was excellent). I thought Speeezy got a bit salty as his idea was shot down and started to argue frankly very tearful arguments. He lost composure as an interviewer and started arguing personal pet peeves unfortunately.

That's one part I didnt like about spreezy too. For one he was thinking too short sighted and only thinking about "now". Who cares If someone uses the safe zone to get to max speed before leaving? If you see them you can catch them at their destination when the safe zones drop at all the outer planets. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'd agree the comment were welcome to be fair but generally it was still a lot of "we're thinking of", "we may", "we could", "that is a good idea".

 

Overall, the sense I got was that, while some points were welcome, NQ is far away from actually implementing any of this and is still in the discussion stages, not even started initial work on most of what was discussed. After this interview I do wonder how JC could put a 6-8 month timeframe on Territory Warfare.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, blazemonger said:

 

I'd agree the comment were welcome to be fair but generally it was still a lot of "we're thinking of", "we may", "we could", "that is a good idea".

 

Overall, the sense I got was that, while some points were welcome, NQ is far away from actually implementing any of this and is still in the discussion stages, not even started initial work on most of what was discussed. After this interview I do wonder how JC could put a 6-8 month timeframe on Territory Warfare.

 

 

That is my impression... I believe that beyond flight and interaction physics, voxels and inventory and progressing server backend technology, they have not started on any of the higher level societal structure (beyond RDMS) or overarching strategic gameplay.

It really still feels like early alpha, and the only reason it feels playable at all is more due to its sandbox nature than the level of development gone into it.


Elite Dangerous alpha was pretty playable. The game had exemplary physics, a working Stellar Forge, NPCs were implemented (though weak), trading worked, proto missions were available (sadly, some of those exact same missions are still available to this day), equipment classes and grades, the basics of a crime and punishment system... And a sense of progression... From ship to ship all the way to the mighty Anaconda, or Jump to Jump to the centre of the galaxy, far rim, nearest nebula, etc...

I don't want to compare the two games directly but rather contrast the states of development they were both in during their respective alpha periods.

 The elite "premium" beta came out, plus a final beta and then a conformational "gamma" was released during which very little added. Bugs were squashed, values were tweaked, assets were improved but the game was recognisable.

This game has so many things left to implement before it's even concept complete, let alone feature complete. So I don't expect critical details to be implemented or even decided yet, TBH.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NQ did lose nearly a year (and a lot of funding) in getting the Montreal Office up and running. The apparent conviction with which JC seems to think there are no red flags to indicate they can't release by the end of 2021 to me seems to be.. a big red flag..

 

I'll happily eat my words if  I'm wrong but I predict NQ will push more and more functionality out beyond "release" to be able to meet that deadline instead of pushing it out as they should.

 

In addition to what NQ will need to do to keep their server tech up and running (mainly the backend) and maintaining/tweaking/balancing current mechanics, here's what NQ thinks they can achieve in the next 12 months to the point where all of this is polished and ready for release:

  • Revamp of industry (to force feed using markets down our throats)
  • Revamp of PVP
  • Mission System
  • Territory Warfare/planet side PVP
  • Pets
  • Player Markets
  • Power management
  • Complete new planet technology
  • revamp/beautify  existing planets
  • New solar systems including the gate system

 

And all of that without considering a (partial) wipe..

Honestly if this is not a red flag with regards to meeting a 2021 release date, I'm not sure what would be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, blazemonger said:
  • Revamp of industry (to force feed using markets down our throats)
  • Revamp of PVP
  • Mission System
  • Territory Warfare/planet side PVP
  • Pets
  • Player Markets
  • Power management
  • Complete new planet technology
  • revamp/beautify  existing planets
  • New solar systems including the gate system

It is worth noting that NQ has pretty much said that anything planet related hes been shoved to post release. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/30/2020 at 7:44 AM, Elrood said:

<rotfl>

"We unify radar range."  -  so xs core will have the same locking range as L core.
"We limit weapons by core size" - so xs core won't be able to have L weapons. 

Wtf. If they remove locking range between xs and l core - there is NO F...ING difference between XS and L core in itself. You can have exactly the same cross-section, even practically the same weight of the ship on XS as on L core too.... 
Its like person A - we will solve it that way. Person B - no, we will solve it that way. Person three-  lets do radar based on cross-section. Lets do all three cause why not?! xD

New meta - cube with L core instead of XS. Actually for pirates it could also be box, they will be able to put in more gold, fuel and engines in. 
 

I'm surprised this simple logic wasn't taken into consideration when designing these changes. Now the meta will just change to an L cube meta especially considering an L core has the most "energy" to hold bigger weapons on it. But more importantly,

 

On 10/30/2020 at 6:54 AM, blazemonger said:

smal

smal

edit: why did you fix it it was cute

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Noddles said:

It is worth noting that NQ has pretty much said that anything planet related hes been shoved to post release. 

Actually, JC has said several times now they want to bring in at least one new solar system next year using the new planet tech..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...