Jump to content

the removed radar nerf that would fix the non L-core PvP problem


Shaman
 Share

Recommended Posts

I know NQ isn't going to listen to me, and i've said this a BILLION times already, but i'm going to say this anyway.

 

smaller core sizes need more perks. There is nothing stopping you from strapping a xs sized ship onto an L core, and getting all of the benefits from that core size. The only 'benefits' you get from smaller core sizes is a slower identification speed (negligible with skills) and a faster repair time (negligible with shields), which, to be frank, is terrible.

 

it didn't used to be so bad either.

before 0.23, radars had a nerf where they could only lock certain core sizes from certain ranges, (eg L radars were only able to lock xs cores from about 40km away), which is a perfect fix to this problem since it removes the issue of small ships being unable to get into the firing range of L cores before being shot at/ destroyed, as well as making the meta much more diverse as the best counter for xs cores would be other xs/s cores (think rock paper scissors, but with cores from xs→s→m→l→xs).

I mean seriously, WHY was this removed? imagine the metagame with something like this, its such a simple fix that would make pvp 10x more fun. my only guess is that NQ came up with this nerf when xs cores could still use L guns, which i guess is a fair fix at the time, but makes absolutely no sense if you remove the ability for those xs ships to use L guns in the first place.

 

my second alternate solution would be to give core sizes different max speeds, which i have seen many people request (including me) and IMO seems like a very good idea. it could finally give people the chance to escape/catch up with their enemies, with the downside of dealing less damage/ being weaker. if NQ cant/wont do the radar fix then I would be very happy with this change as well.

 

I've contacted the devs about this radar a month or so ago, but they never got back to me about what happened to my suggestion. thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I recently shared a few things resembling the developers. Here is what I said :

 

Start citation

"After a long time chatting about in-game PvP topics with other players.

 

Here after reflection my feedback on the subject and 2 proposals which combined will I hope be constructive.

 

1st proposal :

 

Integration of a speed limit difference * between the different types of core.

 

2 ways to proceed

 

- Decrease in max speed

L: 25,5k M 27k S 28,5k XS 30k

Or

- Authorization of a speed boost

L: 30k M: 31,5k S 33k XS 34,5k

(The 2nd version will certainly be more popular with players)

 

* note: as an example I have used a differential of 5% of the Vmax

 

2nd proposition:

 

Incorporated immunity for smaller cores against larger weapons.

L can't shoot XS and S

M can't shoot S

 

* note: no range means that the opponent has a greater theoretical fire range and can engage you from further away before you can start to retaliate

 

Benefits:

 

This suggestion arose out of conversations with other players about what changes could be made to have a significant impact on gameplay without involving significant development resources for the developers.

 

Our wish is to see more possible "tactics" in play that can lead players to adopt more diverse combat doctrines. "

 

End citation 

 

I had added some tables as an example to make it clearer. I do not put them back here but the feedback is still understandable.

I hope this feedback will help the devs to make decisions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Shaman said:

my only guess is that NQ came up with this nerf when xs cores could still use L guns, which i guess is a fair fix at the time, but makes absolutely no sense if you remove the ability for those xs ships to use L guns in the first place.

 

This is the reason. Unfortunately it would seem the right hand doesn't always know what the left hand is doing, or in this case, has done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please don't we don't want the xs cube of death meta to come back that was awful. That you were sitting in a large ship and you could do nothing to defend yourself from xs cores. BTW a large core is supposed to be Endgame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Walter said:

Please don't we don't want the xs cube of death meta to come back that was awful. That you were sitting in a large ship and you could do nothing to defend yourself from xs cores. BTW a large core is supposed to be Endgame.

 

Come on Walter, you're not going to tell me that you won't be able to do anything in your L if a small ship with an XS weapon that has 30 kilometers of range attacks you.

 

Also if you have big L cannons on your ship, why can't you put some S weapons to destroy this XS ?

 

The arguments that nothing can be done against a Core Xs are not valid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Knight-Sevy said:

 

Come on Walter, you're not going to tell me that you won't be able to do anything in your L if a small ship with an XS weapon that has 30 kilometers of range attacks you.

 

Also if you have big L cannons on your ship, why can't you put some S weapons to destroy this XS ?

 

The arguments that nothing can be done against a Core Xs are not valid.

Yeah sure. But he wants that NQ installs the locking range how it was at the start at beta that's a nono. Give all sizes the same radar Range I can see that would work.

But core sizes are not classes like mage archerer or else. It behaves more like Battleratings from War Thunder you there not go with a biplane to fight jets. While you can it's not a great idea

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Core sizes seem pointless in PvP.  Theres no mechanic for 'Fighters or bombers' that make an L carrier with lots of XS nor a 'flack weapon' to brush off those pesky XS cores.  Everyone flies L cores for weapons and even saying it is 'endgame' is mute point as everyone has L cores for ages.   They need to come up with viable smaller cores.

 

O to have an XS core with 'Plasma Bomb' single gun swarm shop and that poor L needing 'flack weapons' to brush them off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Honvik said:

Core sizes seem pointless in PvP.  Theres no mechanic for 'Fighters or bombers' that make an L carrier with lots of XS nor a 'flack weapon' to brush off those pesky XS cores.  Everyone flies L cores for weapons and even saying it is 'endgame' is mute point as everyone has L cores for ages.   They need to come up with viable smaller cores.

 

O to have an XS core with 'Plasma Bomb' single gun swarm shop and that poor L needing 'flack weapons' to brush them off.

If an Org invests 500 mil in an L core ship and how you suggest xs craft get a unique weapon like a torpedo that costs maybe 10 mil the whole thing and pop the L core ship then the balance will further go down to hell. Right now NQ made a balance patch that made M cores viable against L cores even with rare weapons. This was a mockup fight between one 2 seater M core vs a Nano L when fight ended L core nano had 68% shield and M core 60% shield and M core suffered from half of its weapons being obstructed. If NQ removes the range limitation of XS, S, M the balance will shift to smaller cores. L cores need to remain strong because of the investment they represent for an Org thus me calling them Endgame. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Walter said:

If an Org invests 500 mil in an L core ship and how you suggest xs craft get a unique weapon like a torpedo that costs maybe 10 mil the whole thing and pop the L core ship then the balance will further go down to hell. Right now NQ made a balance patch that made M cores viable against L cores even with rare weapons. This was a mockup fight between one 2 seater M core vs a Nano L when fight ended L core nano had 68% shield and M core 60% shield and M core suffered from half of its weapons being obstructed. If NQ removes the range limitation of XS, S, M the balance will shift to smaller cores. L cores need to remain strong because of the investment they represent for an Org thus me calling them Endgame. 

 

What org invests 500m into their L core? I presume your talking all exotic weapons 4 seater massive ship not the general single seater L cores people are flying?  Also cost is subjective its only costing more due to ore prices.

 

What I am suggesting is in a 'normal' space game the biggest ships are always vulnerable to smaller craft thats why they have a counter against it or forced to add flack weapon's to help combat it.  I never said a bomber will be cheap.   You mentioned M core's viable they are to a point (they still use L core shields or L shield) but if NQ goes down to limit shields to core size they suddenly are not viable.   I dont envy NQ trying to balance all of this.  It is just a shame PvP is so poor in DU it needs a complete overall.

 

Lastly in the 'other game' PVP is a breath of fresh air, close action (so its not all via a periscope) and certainly more skilled.  If only DU could move that way.... not 1SU out not 100's KM away etc but thats just my opinon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Walter said:

Yeah sure. But he wants that NQ installs the locking range how it was at the start at beta that's a nono. Give all sizes the same radar Range I can see that would work.

But core sizes are not classes like mage archerer or else. It behaves more like Battleratings from War Thunder you there not go with a biplane to fight jets. While you can it's not a great idea

 

 

I think he is just asking for the locking range before but without being able to put the L weapons back on the XS cores.
The guns on XS was really the big problem.
Potentially I would like this to be done for other elements as well. What will go in the sense that a capital L really has a reason to exist because it has access to things that you cannot use on an S or an M.

 

If not for the balancing between the classes it is one way of seeing things.
But for me XS / S / M or L is not a race of what is end game or not.

 

What should really make the End Game is the quality of the items.

Exotic weapons or that sort of thing.

 

In your example, the biplane and the jets are XS.
except that the biplane is an XS with basic weapon but that the jets is one with exotic weapon.

 

And DU need to adds to this other class of ships.
You have the S which will be like anti hunter frigates.
M's like cruisers
and the L's like cuirassers.

 

Of course your L battleship could look like something from WW1 equipment level or something post Cold War level.
One having no chance against the other.

 

Here is my opion which will make the game more interesting in the long term than the "L core or nothing".

 

 

 

And to add another suggestion, I saw that NQ had said that "element damage under high G is something to consider."
That will be needed for balancing. Too much G but not enough voxel or mass will lead to the loss of the ship. Good thing no ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Honvik said:

 

What org invests 500m into their L core? I presume your talking all exotic weapons 4 seater massive ship not the general single seater L cores people are flying?  Also cost is subjective its only costing more due to ore prices.

 

 

Yes, I am talking of the real thing real capital ships like the ones that fought pre-Appolo, not the poor Nanos that fly around now most elements only. 
And yes many complain about the nature of DU pvp but if you get in a group and play pvp with gunners engineers and pilots Du PvP is great fun and that's why people can't reach a good asteroid these days and not being shot down because many of us really like DU pvp how it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Knight-Sevy said:

And to add another suggestion, I saw that NQ had said that "element damage under high G is something to consider."
That will be needed for balancing. Too much G but not enough voxel or mass will lead to the loss of the ship. Good thing no ?

That would be welcomed

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

they really need to give smaller ships more roles... like ewar..  if they make s cores or xs cores viable againts L cores from a gunner point of view, you risk making L cores redundant (since other than killing other ships L guns have no purpose yet, like attacking space stations etc) 

 

M cores should be viable against L cores... but you might need quite a few... then s and xs cores should be for stuff like weapon dampening.  engine modifiers etc.. so they are a threat to larger ships from a non gun standpoint.  I suspect its the backend thats the issue here... since you'd need the target ship to be fully loaded on your PC (which currently only happens when you are very close or in build mode?)  before the module on a ship 50km away (for example)  could modify its engine stats.  Otherwise the server would have to do the changing of states ?  which gives them a database cost issue. Im just guessing here of course, someone that understands it more than me might be able to help me understand. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, LeoCora said:

they really need to give smaller ships more roles... like ewar..  if they make s cores or xs cores viable againts L cores from a gunner point of view, you risk making L cores redundant (since other than killing other ships L guns have no purpose yet, like attacking space stations etc) 

 

M cores should be viable against L cores... but you might need quite a few... then s and xs cores should be for stuff like weapon dampening.  engine modifiers etc.. so they are a threat to larger ships from a non gun standpoint.  I suspect its the backend thats the issue here... since you'd need the target ship to be fully loaded on your PC (which currently only happens when you are very close or in build mode?)  before the module on a ship 50km away (for example)  could modify its engine stats.  Otherwise the server would have to do the changing of states ?  which gives them a database cost issue. Im just guessing here of course, someone that understands it more than me might be able to help me understand. 

M core Nano is as good as L core nano right now only wins for L core Nano if he uses the range advantage but fast M core Nano can mitigate that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Walter said:

M core Nano is as good as L core nano right now only wins for L core Nano if he uses the range advantage but fast M core Nano can mitigate that.

thats true.. i did see that the boosts to M weapons was pretty good.. its not quite as much damage.. but its close enough as you say to compete.  I've been looking at making some fast M core ships as interceptors

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, VarietyMMOs said:

Smaller cores need utility. You can't simply balance numbers between the cores because someone will always be meta and cause complaints.

 

PVP *before* commenting please. 

who are you refering to?  just checking which post you are replying to

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/27/2021 at 12:48 PM, VarietyMMOs said:

Smaller cores need utility. You can't simply balance numbers between the cores because someone will always be meta and cause complaints.

 

PVP *before* commenting please. 

I agree. Its basically impossible to balance a linear pvp system like this, as there is no variation and so is basically just a matter of stats. thats why im all for this whole rock-paper-scissors system between cores, as I think for PvP to work there needs to be more roles in combat, not only by adding the feature I just mentioned back in, but also by IMO differentiating the different guns that you can put on those constructs more in the first place, other than just 'this gun is faster' or 'that gun uses more capacity' or 'these guns have a higher range' e.g. rails could penetrate a ships hull, and lasers could weaken the resistances for shields.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just make the tracking ability of larger weapons have increasingly diminishing returns based on core size. This is separate from the accuracy once the core has been seen, and separate from accuracy once a ship shoots. This allows micro-L cores to lose some advantage, but not all advantages, as it should be a legit tactic to make smaller L-core ships, but not in most cases. If L size weapons have virtually no ability to track XS cores (again, no regard to seeing them on radar, nor accuracy stats once a core has been tracked/locked onto, basically the time it takes to actually lock on leaves plenty of time for a fast XS ship to be gone), it creates a balance which requires fleets to be built with multiple ship sizes to cope of different possibilities.

 

I also agree with @Shaman, different weapon types need different shaped damage and additional features, like lasers being more efficient against shields.

 

Also see my addition to the recent thread on the most recent update concerning how I think power systems are needed before any semblance of a balanced combat system can be created.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Context said:

 basically the time it takes to actually lock on leaves plenty of time for a fast XS ship to be gone

well, I have some good and some bad news here.

good news is that this feature is already in the game. the time it takes to lock down an xs core is about 40 seconds.

bad news is that value is negligible because of quick wired radars and talents.

 

this would work however if the radar lock range was smaller, for example by this feature removed by nq

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Shaman hmmm, I guess they need to review almost any sci-fi franchise ever, where small fighters are almost immune the bigger warships and only have to worry about other fighters, small warships and sometimes medium sized capital ships?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way NQ approaches the cross section system in PvP really scares me.
 

So far they seem to be trying to make the cross section system work from the XS ship to the L ship.
 

( The insane increase in weapon size is made for this attempt at balancing which I find quite bad. )
 

For me there is a scaling problem which means that it will not work to want the same system for all sizes of cores.
 

Finding a happy medium between an XS with a volume of 4000 m3 and a core L with a volume of 2,097,000 m3 ... Just Meh ... why make that.
 

There should be a very clear distinction between the core sizes.
The principle of cross section should only intervene to differentiate the ships on the same core size.
 

Example with 4 ships you try to shoot with an L weapon :
(value as an example)
 

- M of 10,000m3 => 50% chance of a hit
- M of 50,000m3 => 60% chance of a hit
- L of 10,000m3 => 80% chance of a hit
- L of 50,000m3 => 90% chance of a hit
 

Even if it is almost as big as an L, the ship M needs to be put in a lower category.
Of course, there has to be a balancing:
For an M core: No weapon L, no shield L ect ...
 

We must give a role to all ships.
 

The 380mm guns of the military navy were not designed to shoot down fighter planes!
This must be the same for Dual Universe weapons, why can an L railgun shoot at a target potentially 500 times smaller ?!

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...