Jump to content

When the speed changes are implemented.


Recommended Posts

image.thumb.png.52ce84231062a81437b65a56898557f2.png

 

So we know they are coming.  And i think this is a welcome change.  For one, if you are capped at certain speeds, its less of a factor if you build your ship to 15g or 20g a smaller lighter ship will always catch u if they see u as they have a higher top speed. But with this will come some reblancing.  A good jumping off point would be Shield sizes should be regulated to core size, like guns are.  But rebalance they HP

 

L  -  20mil

M - 15mil

S  -  10mil

XS - 7.5 mil 

 

 

With these changes I think that each core up should have 5 more resist to its pool.

 

L - 15 more

M - 10 more

S -  5 more

XS -  Current pool

 

On top of that I think that the CCS cap should be higher the higher core you go too.  Im not sure on what the cap is, but it should fall in line with that.  So the L core can defacto be the tankiest ship, but it is the SLOWEST.  So a well balanced mix fleet becomes ideal, and the fun comes in everyones ideas and opinions how to outfit their fleet.  

Edited by VandelayIndustries
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some people propose Mass reducing speed, and while in theory i think that can be ok, I do think putting hard limits on core size leads to more engaging combat. Not to mention how things effect hauling.  And it might not even solve the problem, because L cores are often under 1kt so that would mean NQ would have to start very low for the mass to start a reduction, and that sounds pretty bad.  

 

XS - 29999

S   - 28500

M  - 25000

L   - 22000

 

Thats my first spitball speed reductions.  Now doing these changes, also means its less important on the "G's" your ship does, because while it is important, if you are chasing an L core in an M core, if the L core accelarates to top speed 20 seconds faster than you its no biggie because after those few seconds, you start gaing, which leads to more creative buids with CCS.  And voxel tank can matter more because weight becomes a little less of an issue.

 

So you can build L or M with more CCS, can have time to do some repairs again during shield vents,  and L cores can add M or S gunner seats as "point defense" that would hit smaller ships that come too close, and that added weight of extra gunner seat and ammo is negligable when you are capped at a top speed. This leads to more interesting builds, and ROLES.  L cores become more "hold your grid ship" with way more tank, more shield, more ccs, but slower.  M becomes your "mainline combat" and your S core becomes your interceptor.  So rounded out fleets matter.  

 

Cross sections also matter a little less, because guess what, M guns and below can already hit the small nano shields near 100% already, so building bigger, and tankier dont really matter, its only matters now against other L cores.  So L cores now become more incentivies to shoot other L cores in most situations, as they can stay in same speed range, and have more shields and more CCS to be a tankier Siege war ship, or fill a carrier role.  

 

You can even get some EXPANSE VIBES that you and your crew are in an L core and get "swarmed" by a bunch of S cores, so you switch seats out of your L gunner to a small gunner seat of Small Cannons and try to quickly blast those S cores intercepting you.

 

d0c91a81a1d54f7c92032bbaa66d88feaae80a60

 

 

These simple speed changes and shield changes and CCS changes can add way more depth to pvp and fleet, to choices of ship, how you build, what ships need crews or single fighters and place a solid foundation for more to come.  And give ships much needed roles in combat.  These changes are VERY LOW development time as a lot of them are just changing values.

 

 

EDIT -  Also, Prec gun dmg should be half of what the base equivalent of the HEAVY variant of that gun is.  So sniping long range can still be viable, but the person who can get in range should be rewarded with more dps if they choose to use heavy ammo, and it should be a BIG increase, because the time you are out of range not shooting, and your opponent is shooting you is HUGE and adds up every second.  So please balance this out.   and Prec ammo gives 1.5 bonus for dmg, it should probably be 0.8 for the dmg too.  Whatever tweaks can be done to balance out sniping 2su guns. 

 

Edited by VandelayIndustries
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Overall I have the same view of things.
 

We're in Beta, it's time to at least try this kind of thing and see the impact that that has.
Just try.
 

I would like to add 2 small things:
 

1) For the speed reduction, I would like it to be integrated into the territory warfare , When PvP is activated on this space territory (voluntarily or following an attack) all the ships see their speeds reduced in a really important way.
There are also 2 ways to do things, the brutal way and the elegant way.

=> Brutal:
Managed maximum speed cap based on core size to match DU propaganda videos.
Maybe a few hundred kilometers per hour for an L core up to a few thousand for an XS.
=> Elegant:
No hard nerf speed, but block adjusters from ships going too fast.
You will be able to cross the combat zone at 30,000 km/h with your ship, but it will not be able to maneuver. This will indirectly force all ships to reduce their speed when fighting in this area.
 

2) Don't forget to prevent overly large caliber weapons from firing at small ships.
The 380mm guns of a battleship are not used to fire on planes. There are smaller anti-aircraft gun batteries that do this (in game this would be the S weapons).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Knight-Sevy said:

Overall I have the same view of things.
 

We're in Beta, it's time to at least try this kind of thing and see the impact that that has.
Just try.
 

I would like to add 2 small things:
 

1) For the speed reduction, I would like it to be integrated into the territory warfare , When PvP is activated on this space territory (voluntarily or following an attack) all the ships see their speeds reduced in a really important way.
There are also 2 ways to do things, the brutal way and the elegant way.

=> Brutal:
Managed maximum speed cap based on core size to match DU propaganda videos.
Maybe a few hundred kilometers per hour for an L core up to a few thousand for an XS.
=> Elegant:
No hard nerf speed, but block adjusters from ships going too fast.
You will be able to cross the combat zone at 30,000 km/h with your ship, but it will not be able to maneuver. This will indirectly force all ships to reduce their speed when fighting in this area.
 

2) Don't forget to prevent overly large caliber weapons from firing at small ships.
The 380mm guns of a battleship are not used to fire on planes. There are smaller anti-aircraft gun batteries that do this (in game this would be the S weapons).

 

While I'm not opposed to that idea or type of gameplay right away, I'd like to see how TW does with speed changes first.  A second point is space pvp is what it is, and I don't think it should be like the videos it put out, I think that more falls in line with atmo pvp (that for all we know has been forever canceled).

 

One way to help TW tho would be to give the shields around space stations MASSIVE HP. Think 100s of millions if not 1billion. Or more. It means you need serious fleet to attack, and L cores. L cores would put out the massive DPS needed to cap the shields in a timely manner, and 4 S cores aren't gonna go start a shield timer on some whim.  It makes L cores valuable for sieging and defense, with some smaller cores for support. But an enemy attacking should be able to flee, no need for further slow downs. If I'm defending my space station and enemy is losing and starts to flee I don't need to rack up massive kills to feel amazing about my victory, I already will. 

 

 

Edited by VandelayIndustries
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree with Vandelay, a lot of synergistic "low hanging fruit" on how to enhance gameplay when rolling out core specific speeds. The more strategizing (i.e. choice of dynamic core size, gunner seat size, ccs amount, etc.) involved the better.  And for those that roll their eyes at PVPers, PVP should be a driver of the economy, at least a healthy one....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Limiting speed in space means further gamifying  Dual Univeerse in order to appease the pewpew crowd.

 

Speed in space is limited .. to the speed of light. obviously getting up there is pretty much impossible but the very simple laws of physics would remain in place. Any object shoudl be able to hit the same max speed depending on it's ability to generate enough force to get it there. High Mass objects (size is really irrelevant here) should need more time and/or more thrust to get there but they still should have the  ability to.

 

Limiting speed by core size will also mean you have to start creating all sorts of additional mechanics and checks to prevent someone from "cheating the system" by making a small construct very heavy. By simply adhering to the laws of physics you only have to deal with one factor , mass, to achieve the same..  You add XL guns (with high mass) to an XS core? sure, but that means you will not have the room to fit the XL engines you need to move that mass and even if you do, the combination of two elements with high mass means you still limit yourself.

 

NQ continues to overthink and over engineer mechanics while the solutions that they could use are far more elegant and yes, more efficient in a good many ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, blazemonger said:

Limiting speed in space means further gamyfying  Dual Univeerse in order to appeease the pewpew crowd.

 

Speed in space is limited .. to the speed of light. obviously getting up there is pretty much impossible but the very simple laws of physics whould remain in place. Any object shoudl be able to hit the same max speed depending on it's ability to generate enough force to get it there. High Mass objects (size is really irrelevant here) should need more time and/or more thrust to get there but they still should have the  ability to.

 

Limiting speed by core will also mean you have to start creating all sorts of additional mechanics and checks to prevent someone from "cheating the system" by making a small construct very heavy. By simply adhering to the laws of physics you only have to deal with one factor , mass, to achieve the same..  You add XL guns (with high mass) to an XS core? sure, but that means you will not have the room to fit the XL engines you need to move that mass and even if you do, the combination of two elements with high mass means you still limit yourself.

 

NQ continues to overthink and over engineer mechanics whil ethe solutions that they could use are far more elegant and yes, more efficient in a good many ways.

 

A freighter in eve doesn't move or warp as fast as a frigate. A plated battleship moves slower than a cruiser, and warps slower.  A Titan capital ship moves at a crawl, takes 45 seconds to align, and warps the slowest. Do you go on eve forums and complain about the speed of light there. This is suppose to be a game and you need restrictions.  You are out of your element in this thread.

Edited by VandelayIndustries
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/15/2022 at 8:25 AM, VandelayIndustries said:

A freighter in eve doesn't move or warp as fast as a frigate.

 

EVE does not apply Newtonian physics. DU does, at least in space.

IMO sacrificing that in order to make PVP "more accesible" would be a mistake. But obviously, that is a choice NQ will have to decide on I guess

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, VandelayIndustries said:

A game means more subs, more money, more population.  They already made hard limits with cores.  Then they made limits on what size guns could be on the cores.  We desperately need a game, or else there won't even be servers to log into.


And decreasing the max speed is going to attract more players how? It's not like you can say "the game is finally balanced" and millions of players just show up. The only thing achieved by taking away things that people could do before is people leaving. Nerf paradigm is not the only strategy to balance things. Buff paradigm can be used to balance things instead.

How about instead of speed nerfs we get speed buffs by over-driving the engines up to 130% throttle to a final speed of 39,000km/h but with a trade-off of losing the engine HP starting at over 100% throttle during acceleration continually until it breaks. Smaller engines could over-drive for longer than the bigger ones. The buff speed of 39,000km/h drops off gradually to 30,000km/h if throttle is not at 130%. Different "flavors" of engines would have different rates of HP loss when over-driven. i.e. Military can be over-driven for considerably longer than the Basic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont know why 39k kmh specifically, seems a bit much, but other than that...

Damn, THAT IS BRILLIANT.



(you can even spin this slight irrealism as: the nebula is not a  perfect void, the parts were designed to withstand 30,000kmh, but the engines can do more)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Owl_Superb said:


And decreasing the max speed is going to attract more players how? It's not like you can say "the game is finally balanced" and millions of players just show up. The only thing achieved by taking away things that people could do before is people leaving. Nerf paradigm is not the only strategy to balance things. Buff paradigm can be used to balance things instead.

How about instead of speed nerfs we get speed buffs by over-driving the engines up to 130% throttle to a final speed of 39,000km/h but with a trade-off of losing the engine HP starting at over 100% throttle during acceleration continually until it breaks. Smaller engines could over-drive for longer than the bigger ones. The buff speed of 39,000km/h drops off gradually to 30,000km/h if throttle is not at 130%. Different "flavors" of engines would have different rates of HP loss when over-driven. i.e. Military can be over-driven for considerably longer than the Basic.

 

Because in the past NQ has specifically said 30k was chosen because the game breaks down past that speed.  So you can only go down.  Unless they somehow remedied that, then that's the way its gonna be.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will be enough to limit the speed on territories which are in weakness (attackable).
Most of the time people will be able to go to Vmax as before.
Unless they enter a combat zone.

This can be a first step. There are things to do.

All weapons in the game are based on the fact that smaller ships are faster than larger ones.

Except that NQ didn't code the part that corresponds to that...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Knight-Sevy said:

It will be enough to limit the speed on territories which are in weakness (attackable).
Most of the time people will be able to go to Vmax as before.
Unless they enter a combat zone.

This can be a first step. There are things to do.

All weapons in the game are based on the fact that smaller ships are faster than larger ones.

Except that NQ didn't code the part that corresponds to that...

 

I personally think space should be space whatever/however they implement the mechanic.  Isn't that kind of the problem right now? Tacking on pvp instead of having it interwoven with all mechanics to make a game that flows and works.  Im firmly against "combat zones" being the only thing that slow you down, and NQ has at least not hinted anything of the such.  What makes a combat zone, is if you bring combat....to that zone. 

Edited by VandelayIndustries
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish that were the case.
But the game is already slow to death.
If there is a speed nerf everywhere. The entire PvE community will block this change.

I will be for the speed to be restricted but it will be necessary to change the warp system to allow everyone to skip all the time the 3 hours of useless journey between 2 planets.
And of course add the possibility of getting people out of their warp to balance all that through PvP.

But NQ didn't say anything like that and never talked to the PvP community about this change.
There is a good chance that the wrong choices will be made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Knight-Sevy said:

I wish that were the case.
But the game is already slow to death.
If there is a speed nerf everywhere. The entire PvE community will block this change.

I will be for the speed to be restricted but it will be necessary to change the warp system to allow everyone to skip all the time the 3 hours of useless journey between 2 planets.
And of course add the possibility of getting people out of their warp to balance all that through PvP.

But NQ didn't say anything like that and never talked to the PvP community about this change.
There is a good chance that the wrong choices will be made.

 

Ya, if I had my way I'd remove at least 4 planets and then also move them closer. Expansion of DU as a game seems better as in more systems (only if needed by population increas) then mindless 5 hour slow boats. But that's not gonna be on the table.  I hope if they ever do get a new system they learn to do less planets and a little less distance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/16/2022 at 10:02 PM, Sevian said:

So now it'll take even LONGER to slow boat? Because 4-9 hours of travel wasn't long enough?

 

No, this is stupid.

 

That's why I'm proposing that the space territory warfare that is to come bring this speed reduction only on controlled areas and in combat mode.

The status of a space territory would be:
- In "weakness" mode when you just put it down. Need to defend it for a few hours.
- In "protection" mode. The area is secure for the owners. However aggressors can bring down the protection shield which will activate the PvP timer on the time slot chosen by the defenders.
=> this activates the weakness mode which reduces the speed in this whole area.

Of course the activation of the state of weakness can be activated at any time by the owner. But this exposes him to being attacked.


In summary, the speed for travel between planets does not change (but 3 or 5 hours remains a problem).
You will only be slowed if you cross a territory in "weakness" mode.
This will allow PvP to happen without PvE sabotaging the nerf speed plan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The speed should be the same regardless.  What if I want to fight at asteroids? or near a planet.  IT would be pretty stupid to restrict it to some new TW spot they make.  Its kinda stupid that the main gameplay for missions is 5 hours right now to start with, and changing the solar system when they wipe for release is the best solution realistically.  Otherwise what, we gonna have all these tacked on half baked ideas that dont ever mesh together?  So if i go to asteroid im back to my L core being defacto fastest, tankiest, highest dps, but only in some battle arena it slows down?  Doesnt sound like a game i really want to play at all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having an artificial speed limit base on core size (or any other such mechanic) is fundamentally wrong and goes against all premises made in this game where the flight model is based around real physics based attributes like mass, drag and inertia.

 

To me this looks like NQ for nth time has been blindsided by the chance to make "content" at a low dev cost, and by doing so decided to "throw the baby out with the bathwater"... again.

 

The real problem here is that NQ has been designing elements willy-nilly without any master plan for size and weight and how this will affect game play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, CptLoRes said:

Having an artificial speed limit base on core size (or any other such mechanic) is fundamentally wrong and goes against all premises made in this game where the flight model is based around real physics based attributes like mass, drag and inertia.

 

To me this looks like NQ for nth time has been blindsided by the chance to make "content" at a low dev cost, and by doing so decided to "throw the baby out with the bathwater"... again.

 

The real problem here is that NQ has been designing elements willy-nilly without any master plan for size and weight and how this will affect game play.

Ah the moronic view that something by being closer to real physics is somehow better. Better game play makes games better. Because it’s a GAME

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tell that to NQ when they decided to base the ENTIRE game on Newtonian physics.

Real world approximations of mass and size are fundamental in this game, used for almost everything like ore, materials, voxels, elements, engines, wings etc. Heck there is even a inertia matrix built into the build UI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CptLoRes said:

Tell that to NQ when they decided to base the ENTIRE game on Newtonian physics.

Real world approximations of mass and size are fundamental in this game, used for almost everything like ore, materials, voxels, elements, engines, wings etc. Heck there is even a inertia matrix built into the build UI.

 

Just like their model for YEARS of resource gathering was digging underground and finite ore.  Man how quickly that changed.  Just like their newtonian physics.  Looks like they finally see that making a game is better move.

 

And if NQ really gave a damn, they wouldnt have put in "space brakes" or the retro rockets that consume no fuel. You would have adjusters that consume fuel, and only engines to speed you up, and slow you down.  But we dont have that do we.  Dont even need rockets to get outta atmo.  We have atmo engines that thrust us into space than magical space engines to propel us further.  And anti-gravity drives.  And warp.  Take a hint. 

Edited by VandelayIndustries
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...