Topic: Detector/EW changes

(I know we have multiple topics about this, but I thought it would be easier to make a new topic about the changes we plan to do.)

1. Signal detector balance

We don't think it should be removed from the game as some of you propose, but we agree they need some finetuning. We plan to reduce the detection boost, and also introduce a masking debuff effect that lasts as long as the detection effect. Ie. if you use a detector, you become more visible for others too.

Signal detection modification changes:
T1 30% -> 20%
T2 30% -> 20%
T3 40% -> 27.5%
T4 50% -> 35%

Equal penalties to signal masking added to the module effect:
T1 -20%
T2 -20%
T3 -27.5%
T4 -35%

2. ECM/Suppressor vs ECCM

We feel ECCM is a little underpowered and ECM tuning stacking is also an issue, so we propose 2 changes here:
- New extension that gives 2% sensor strength per level. (Stacks with the ECCM's sensor strength modifier.)
- Change the ECM tunings' EW strength modifier from a percentage multiplier to a fixed amount that simply adds to the base value.
Note: Suppressor tunings have a similar stacking issue and we're planning a change, but we don't have a solution for that just yet.

ps. DEV Alf is back from the dead, you can expect more ner... balancing changes in the near future smile

Re: Detector/EW changes

A sensor strength extension is no different than a navigation extension; all of the same arguments for removing Nav apply to not adding in this.

3 (edited by Syndic 2014-05-28 15:11:13)

Re: Detector/EW changes

1.
- If using a detector introduces a masking debuff, will using a masker introduce a detection debuff?

2.
- Adding a Sensor Strength extension makes it mandatory to use ECM/Supp tunings, and its a "must-have" extension like "everyone get Navigation 10" was, bad idea tbh.
- Perhaps ECM/Supp tunings could be made a unique module like ERP/LWF to avoid ridiculous stacking? You can tune down the existing ECM/Supp modules from 35% to 25% and achieve the same goal.

[18:20:30] <GLiMPSE> Chairman Of My Heart o/
CIR Complaint Form

The Imperial Grand Wizard of Justice

Re: Detector/EW changes

DEV Zoom wrote:

Signal detection modification changes:
T1 30% -> 20%
T2 30% -> 20%
T3 40% -> 27.5%
T4 50% -> 35%

Old value: can see mech/indus from ~2.6k away, new value: can see the same from ~2.35k away. Detection distance decrease: ~10%. This change is pointless.

DEV Zoom wrote:

Equal penalties to signal masking added to the module effect:
T1 -20%
T2 -20%
T3 -27.5%
T4 -35%

Not sure about the numbers, but this is a very good idea.

DEV Zoom wrote:

- New extension that gives 2% sensor strength per level. (Stacks with the ECCM's sensor strength modifier.)

Yet another brick in the wall that greets every new player.

Re: Detector/EW changes

That's a boring and generic way to fix/rebalance something, Zoom.

I believe pvp could be very exciting and the game has what it takes. But this is game is ruined and we all know  by who, it´s by corps like CiR, -77- and PHM. - by Fu ManChu

Re: Detector/EW changes

how about this:
instead of a general sensor strength bonus you could add a extention to increase the eccms only. pll have extentions for +ecm strength. so a extention for +eccm strength seams more valid from my point of view. especially it will not change the effects on bots that dont have counter ewar fitted.

point is ewar can be good, but there should be options against it (besides countering it with more ewar). like effective eccms with skills that get that to a usefull level (what ever that means in numbers).
a unprotected bot can easy fall victim to ewar. a protected bot, not so much.

maybe reactor sealings should be looked at as well.

Re: Detector/EW changes

Syndic wrote:

- Perhaps ECM/Supp tunings could be made a unique module like ERP/LWF to avoid ridiculous stacking? You can tune down the existing ECM/Supp modules from 35% to 25% and achieve the same goal.

+1

Steam achievement Unlocked:  Being a Badass
http://www.perp-kill.net/kill/239407
Dev Zoom: I think its time to confess, Ville is my alt
Dev Zoom: Ville can be sometimes so sane it's scary.

Re: Detector/EW changes

Would seem to make more sense to place the 2% sensor strength as a modifier to ECCM modual, not the bots base.

As already stated, 1.) mandatory 'Nav' argument. Also, 2.) this should be about decision making in fitting. If you want more sensor strength you have to FIT the mod. Many just refuse to use ECCM because stacking bonus on rep/damage tunings is hard to give up. With 2% modification to base you incentivize that full tuner fit, and there is less incentive to fit ECCM.

Make the Mod stronger, not the Bot.

Re: Detector/EW changes

Would 2% sensor strength also help ewar modules?  Or did I just go full ***?

Steam achievement Unlocked:  Being a Badass
http://www.perp-kill.net/kill/239407
Dev Zoom: I think its time to confess, Ville is my alt
Dev Zoom: Ville can be sometimes so sane it's scary.

Re: Detector/EW changes

You just went full tard

<GargajCNS> we maim to please

Re: Detector/EW changes

In line with this there should be a Demobilization Resistance skill introduced, because a competent EW with double short demobs will slow someone without a plate down to 2kph. smile

[18:20:30] <GLiMPSE> Chairman Of My Heart o/
CIR Complaint Form

The Imperial Grand Wizard of Justice

Re: Detector/EW changes

Ville wrote:

Would 2% sensor strength also help ewar modules?  Or did I just go full ***?

No it wouldn't, ewar modules have "EW strength", which needs to overcome the target's "Sensor strength".

And we don't agree with the mandatory argument at all. If an extension that's only used in specific PvP situations is mandatory, then we might as well start removing half of the extensions from the game, starting with General firing.

13 (edited by Tund Bungler 2014-05-28 16:18:35)

Re: Detector/EW changes

Its not just 'specific' PVP situations. I know you guys dont PVP a lot in the game, but its literally 99%+ PVP situations.

Its also mandatory for PVE; both for combats and followbots. Don't add more extensions to the game with all these new players joining in; they dont have the hundreds of thousands of banked EP we do to instantly fill the new skill up and it will only make the gap between vet and noob bigger.

14 (edited by Inda 2014-05-28 16:26:59)

Re: Detector/EW changes

1st:
+1

2nd:
We dont need eccm extension.
What about active eccm? Try somewhere there I think there is the solution. Use more accu, when you got ecm, or supressed.

I will have 120 eW Kain tomorrow if you implement it. This change do more thing what you can imagine, my solo carrear is will be more obsolete, even worse than before (imagine why).

Energy to Earth!

18.01.2014. [12:57:58] <BeastmodeGuNs> after that i remembered all those warning about 1v1 you lol, and i found out why xD

Re: Detector/EW changes

Syndic wrote:

In line with this there should be a Demobilization Resistance skill introduced, because a competent EW with double short demobs will slow someone without a plate down to 2kph. smile

We already have a demobilization resistance with modules, in terms of plates.

Remedy Inc. recruiting. Schliess dich uns an. Bewerbung und Guides unter: www.remedy-inc.de
#Bad Robot
#RSI Star Citizen: REMEDY

Re: Detector/EW changes

DEV Zoom wrote:

And we don't agree with the mandatory argument at all. If an extension that's only used in specific PvP situations is mandatory, then we might as well start removing half of the extensions from the game, starting with General firing.

Quite serious suggestion, why not? Why have a CPU extension, a Reactor extension, a Mechanics extension or for that matter something as broad as a General Firing extension.

If all the fitting and buffing/nerfing extensions were designed to affect specific modules or small groups of modules rather than bots or wide groups of modules (e.g. all EWAR or all turrets/missiles) then the player has much more choice about specialising early on and there are more complex fitting choices to suit or counter specific situations.

17 (edited by Grond 2014-05-28 16:39:52)

Re: Detector/EW changes

DEV Zoom wrote:
2. ECM/Suppressor vs ECCM

Change the ECM tunings' EW strength modifier from a percentage multiplier to a fixed amount that simply adds to the base value.

i suport this choise

Re: Detector/EW changes

Leave it all alone for now and focus on gamma or something else.

John 3:16 - Timothy 2:23

Re: Detector/EW changes

both suggested changes are pointless they way described.

simple number changes wont change anything but making maxed extensions + t4 modules mandatory, t1/low extensions pointless, and reducing the overall game experience even more into the "all or nothing" system that is so attractive for new player...

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear

20 (edited by Syndic 2014-05-28 17:11:55)

Re: Detector/EW changes

MoBIoS wrote:
Syndic wrote:

In line with this there should be a Demobilization Resistance skill introduced, because a competent EW with double short demobs will slow someone without a plate down to 2kph. smile

We already have a demobilization resistance with modules, in terms of plates.

That's exactly my point.

If you don't want to be demobbed to 1-2 kph, you slap a plate on.

If you don't want to be ewared out 100%, you slap 1-2 ECCMs on.

The proposed extension only serves to remove the choice from either fitting DPS and being vulnerable to EWAR, or fitting anti-EWAR and being a little gimped at DPS/Tank.

Extension that increases your sensor strength by 20% is a mandatory extension. Even 10% I would still call it mandatory and tell everyone in my corp to bring it up to 10 ASAP.

[18:20:30] <GLiMPSE> Chairman Of My Heart o/
CIR Complaint Form

The Imperial Grand Wizard of Justice

Re: Detector/EW changes

Hi guys!

Your feedback is really appreciated!

Just some thoughts:
Nav was mandatory, but many other extensions are just as mandatory aswell. Nav was special because it was the first extension to max before any other, it simply helped everyone in every situtaion everyday.
This new extension is no doubt will be maxed out by all of you (IF it goes to live), but unlike the Nav you don't have to have it from day1.
(Ext affecting only the eccm module is also an option that come to our mind aswell)


Also if you equip an ECM and you use it you compete against the targets base sensor strenght.
If you equip guns to destroy your target you compete against its hp (you get extensions for hp, and those are affecting plates as well)
If you raise your ECM extensions you will compete against the basic sensor str still.
The modules provide you options to affect targets different ways. Extensions are helping you with that, but you should also be able to defend yourself with extension not with just equipment.

Currently there is some chaos in this department, some stuff are dampened by extensions some are not, this should be ironed out in the future.

I also really like the idea of only modul affecting extensions, I made some plans about this 2 years ago already, and many other stuff.

While the others are working on gammas, I'm focusing on these and other hot topics, like giving additional masking to all the indies, and way more changes to Termis Mk2 as well.

"Rock is OP. Paper is okay." - Scissors

Re: Detector/EW changes

DEV Alf wrote:

Hi guys!

Your feedback is really appreciated!

Just some thoughts:
Nav was mandatory, but many other extensions are just as mandatory aswell. Nav was special because it was the first extension to max before any other, it simply helped everyone in every situtaion everyday.
This new extension is no doubt will be maxed out by all of you (IF it goes to live), but unlike the Nav you don't have to have it from day1.
(Ext affecting only the eccm module is also an option that come to our mind aswell)


Also if you equip an ECM and you use it you compete against the targets base sensor strenght.
If you equip guns to destroy your target you compete against its hp (you get extensions for hp, and those are affecting plates as well)
If you raise your ECM extensions you will compete against the basic sensor str still.
The modules provide you options to affect targets different ways. Extensions are helping you with that, but you should also be able to defend yourself with extension not with just equipment.

Currently there is some chaos in this department, some stuff are dampened by extensions some are not, this should be ironed out in the future.

I also really like the idea of only modul affecting extensions, I made some plans about this 2 years ago already, and many other stuff.

While the others are working on gammas, I'm focusing on these and other hot topics, like giving additional masking to all the indies, and way more changes to Termis Mk2 as well.

Please just don't go crazy and give us stuff i.e. like long range demob and short range demobs all over again.  smile

John 3:16 - Timothy 2:23

Re: Detector/EW changes

As long as it goes through extensive testing on the test server I don't think anyone will mind you trying your crazy ideas Alf.  smile

[18:20:30] <GLiMPSE> Chairman Of My Heart o/
CIR Complaint Form

The Imperial Grand Wizard of Justice

Re: Detector/EW changes

The main problem with the ECCM's seem to be their unreliability but that is because ECM mechanic uses a RNG with everything that comes with it. So i suggest a change to the ECCM mechanic or maybe an additional way to protect yourself against sensor tampering.

An ECCM module that creates an protective bubble around your bot whenever it cycles. Any Ewar that would mess with your sensors pops the bubble and gets negated. While the bubble is down you are atackable by ECM and suppressors normally.

Balancing would mainly deal with the cycle time of such a module and a possible extension to lower it. Also it still might be worth to fit multiple of those to time their cycle time potentially doubling the effect of one module.

25 (edited by Rage Rex 2014-05-28 20:23:01)

Re: Detector/EW changes

DEV Zoom wrote:

(I know we have multiple topics about this, but I thought it would be easier to make a new topic about the changes we plan to do.)

1. Signal detector balance
2. ECM/Suppressor vs ECCM

ps. DEV Alf is back from the dead, you can expect more ner... balancing changes in the near future smile

I had presumed this was more an 'announcement' than a 'discussion' but you did post in Balancing thread. And with Def Alf asking for feedback on these issues it appears this is all open for discussion, yes?

First Suggestion: Split this Thread in Two. This will be a cluster *** if you try to combine feedback for ewar and detection/masking in one thread. They easily each deserve their own discussion threads

Since Def Alf is back on board all previous countless threads and posts on these topics should be re-represented so that Dev Alf can make decisions. And I beg you Dev Alf to TAKE SMALL STEPS and tweak one aspect at a time. Also, heavy moderation will be required as Corporation Discussion and ad hominem attacks are inevitable.

DEV Alf wrote:

Your feedback is really appreciated!

Just some thoughts:
Nav was mandatory, but many other extensions are just as mandatory aswell. Nav was special because it was the first extension to max before any other, it simply helped everyone in every situtaion everyday.
This new extension is no doubt will be maxed out by all of you (IF it goes to live), but unlike the Nav you don't have to have it from day1.
(Ext affecting only the eccm module is also an option that come to our mind aswell)