Re: Detection / Masking

Syndic: of course you don't have to agree with every change we make. And similarly, we don't have to agree with all the feedback that the players are giving us. If you don't agree, simply take these topics as an early warning of the incoming changes. As far as I can remember, this has been what many of you asked for.

Re: Detection / Masking

You're doing a great job Alf. Don't let the haters get you down!

Those of you lucky enough to have your lives, take them with you. However, leave the mods you've lost. They belong to me now.

Scarab Kill Count:2

Re: Detection / Masking

DEV Zoom wrote:

Syndic: of course you don't have to agree with every change we make. And similarly, we don't have to agree with all the feedback that the players are giving us. If you don't agree, simply take these topics as an early warning of the incoming changes. As far as I can remember, this has been what many of you asked for.

That's very true, we will definitely be taking full advantage of the awesome possibilities these patches will provide us with. lol

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

The Imperial Grand Wizard of Justice

Re: Detection / Masking

Tund Bungler wrote:

All the folks who actually PVP regularly with competence are in this thread screaming that this is not the case. Please start listening to them.

I don't think Devs see it that way. Content and coherence of argument weighs far less than thread and post counts. They have been flying blind in the 'balance' and 'fix' departments for some time.

But somehow occasionally they surprise me. I wrote off ewar weeks ago. I know it's as good as dead. As for detection, meh ...next stop "oops we need to adjust makers too."

Re: Detection / Masking

DEV Zoom wrote:

As far as I can remember, this has been what many of you asked for.

Manipulation by thread and post count. It's the same few guys complaining over and over but you don't see it.

56

Re: Detection / Masking

Rage Rex wrote:
DEV Zoom wrote:

As far as I can remember, this has been what many of you asked for.

Manipulation by thread and post count. It's the same few guys complaining over and over but you don't see it.

This is completely delusional. It's your side that floods basically every thread.

Re: Detection / Masking

DEV Zoom wrote:

Syndic: of course you don't have to agree with every change we make. And similarly, we don't have to agree with all the feedback that the players are giving us. If you don't agree, simply take these topics as an early warning of the incoming changes. As far as I can remember, this has been what many of you asked for.

We don't ask for *** mechanics.  We asked you to fix castel mk2s.  We asked you to turn down detectors.  And up masking of industrials.

You do this then add an over the top mechanic.

Turn down detectors/maskers in tandem 15 - 20%.
Buff industrial masking.

Those two things all you had to do.

And if this kind of attitude is pushed by the team.  I'm not going to waste my time ever logging into the test server.

You ask us to test it, we give negative feedback and then it's pushed to the live server.  So what that says to me is you don't care.

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: Detection / Masking

Ville wrote:

You ask us to test it, we give negative feedback and then it's pushed to the live server.  So what that says to me is you don't care.

What you're moaning about is not even on the test server yet, you're just theorycrafting without backing it with actual numbers.

Re: Detection / Masking

DEV Zoom wrote:
Ville wrote:

You ask us to test it, we give negative feedback and then it's pushed to the live server.  So what that says to me is you don't care.

What you're moaning about is not even on the test server yet, you're just theorycrafting without backing it with actual numbers.

The only difference between you and Ville is only one of you two gets paid to theory craft.

If you knew and didn't have to craft, it would already be in game.

Undefeated 2013
"Even alone you probably are one of the best" - Khader Khan
"Lemon the 1 man army .... also know as: THE TERMINATOR!" - Obi Wan
"There are people who are just better then you at doing many things at one time, some are far better then myself, far better." -Merkle

Re: Detection / Masking

Ville wrote:

Tested:

Masked Light ewar can see a detector at 1100 M(ish) While a Detector sees the Masked ewar at 700.

-If you intend to keep the debuff masking mechanic, the debuff needs to be dropped.  so a light ewar sees the detection unit at the same time, at L10 skills w/  +5% spark.  If not the light ewar can kite the detector all day long.

-Masking/Detection need to be dropped in tandem.  If you plan on dropping the detector 24%  Then drop maskers 24%.

-Simple fix is increasing the CPU of the detection module.

Light Ewar doesn't see a masked cast MK2 passive detector till 400 M.

With Server lag, calculates to 350 M.  If you aren't paying attention by the time a masked castel mk2 can tackle you is 8 seconds.

Hi DEV Zoom.

I respectfully ask you to reread this post I have quoted.  As you claim I was merely theory crafting, I however was not.  Kind Sir, I kindly ask that you take the feedback into consideration. 

Yours truly,
Ville

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: Detection / Masking

From page 1, hard numbers are located there.

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: Detection / Masking

Tbh I would be fine with raising the masking of industrials and dropping the detector bonus from percent to a passive module and flat amount like eccm.

Re: Detection / Masking

Giving a flat amount in effect could also work.

We like the way of it as an effect, and with the masking debuff you have to move forward slowly, but you can still sweep a large area while remain undetected, and you may also detect players on the other side of mountains, that otherwise you wouldn't be able like with going around kms long with a masked ew light masked (which we wish to keep as an alternative for scouting).
We also working on that if you see an enemy on landmarks and it the detector effect pops up, the radar will ping just like with probes. Filtered players like friendlies should not trigger the ping. This will be a good headsup for unaware players.

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

64 (edited by Gremrod 2014-06-24 22:45:37)

Re: Detection / Masking

DEV Alf wrote:

We also working on that if you see an enemy on landmarks and it the detector effect pops up, the radar will ping just like with probes. Filtered players like friendlies should not trigger the ping. This will be a good headsup for unaware players.

I would also suggest making the sound for this ping different then the probe ping.

Maybe a sound like a sonar ping.

John 3:16 - Timothy 2:23

Re: Detection / Masking

Do we really need the ping? I hate to incentive people to put up 6 alts in detectors on 6 different gates and wait to hear the ping while playing Xcom...

Those of you lucky enough to have your lives, take them with you. However, leave the mods you've lost. They belong to me now.

Scarab Kill Count:2

Re: Detection / Masking

DEV Alf wrote:

Giving a flat amount in effect could also work.

We like the way of it as an effect, and with the masking debuff you have to move forward slowly, but you can still sweep a large area while remain undetected, and you may also detect players on the other side of mountains, that otherwise you wouldn't be able like with going around kms long with a masked ew light masked (which we wish to keep as an alternative for scouting).
We also working on that if you see an enemy on landmarks and it the detector effect pops up, the radar will ping just like with probes. Filtered players like friendlies should not trigger the ping. This will be a good headsup for unaware players.

And then we put a masker on a castel/prom/yagel mk2.

Voila, detectors become about as useful as L-demobs.

lol

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

The Imperial Grand Wizard of Justice

Re: Detection / Masking

DEV Alf wrote:

We 1. like the way of it as an effect, and with the masking debuff you have to move forward slowly, 2. but you can still sweep a large area while remain undetected

I'm going to explain in depth again how this debuff during detection cycles are going to work in game.

Part 2. Is a Lie.
For Offensive Purposes we can't sweep large Islands for multiple purposes.
First off anyone can stick a detector under the station and can see ANOTHER detection unit for 3K.  3000 M.  Put a 3K circle around each outpost and gate then tell me how much room that leaves you?
Part 1, revisited.
Secondly a Detection Unit can see an unmasked Mech at 1.7K, while it sees the castel at 2.5K.  That ives you an 800M oh *** moment so if your both moving in a similar manner than by the time detector sees each other again your spotted.
Thirdly, people use detection mods on their mechs in a fleet gang to avoid being flanked, or to give a secondly set of eyes with a group for mobility.  This will no longer be used because It will be a beacon shining 3K away going "HERE WE ARE!"

- I am telling you now if you make this change you will remove offense detection from the game, because anyone who has effectively played with it will not use it. 

Defense Detection units.
First part:  The only use for detectors will be for gate scouts and station scouts. 
-People using them to Ninja mine to scout for their op will no longer use them, why because someone else can see them at 3K.
-Jumping into a gate to scout an island running a load to a station will be a give away, why can see another Detector at 3K.

-What will the players use then?  Passive detectors.  Masked bots you can't see till 300~700 M but see you at 1100 +

The ONLY use for detectors will be under stations or gate scouts.  No one will use them to sweep large areas, I promise you. 

-We as a player base just wanted an overall reduction of detection.  The masking debuff is not a good thing.  I will no longer use a detector in this game because of this change.

--I want my EP back for detection Extension with this change.

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: Detection / Masking

I like the change.

Ville is wrong.

Re: Detection / Masking

+1 to EP reimburse

If I had the choice to invest EP into detection under this rulechange, I would never waste EP on it.

I advise everyone not to spend 10$ to reduce the extension though, that would just be enabling this sort of behavior.

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

The Imperial Grand Wizard of Justice

Re: Detection / Masking

Syndic wrote:

+1 to EP reimburse

If I had the choice to invest EP into detection under this rulechange, I would never waste EP on it.

I advise everyone not to spend 10$ to reduce the extension though, that would just be enabling this sort of behavior.


This. This hits all the relevant points.

71 (edited by Burial 2014-06-25 15:31:43)

Re: Detection / Masking

DEV Alf wrote:

We like the way of it as an effect, and with the masking debuff you have to move forward slowly, but you can still sweep a large area while remain undetected.

Why exactly are we nerfing it? I thought the whole purpose was to make sweeping large areas harder.

(I'm not really following this thread much, but this just poked my eye.)

Re: Detection / Masking

Burial wrote:
DEV Alf wrote:

We like the way of it as an effect, and with the masking debuff you have to move forward slowly, but you can still sweep a large area while remain undetected.

Why exactly are we nerfing it? I thought the whole purpose was to make sweeping large areas harder.

(I'm not really following this thread much, but this just poked my eye.)

That's what MOST of us can't understand, we just wanted a detection reduction, what we got was a sideways mechanic that creates more harm than good.

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: Detection / Masking

Gunner wrote:

I like the change.

Ville is wrong.

+1

It should require a small squad to scout the flanks, not a module that gives you a huge warning where people are.  It encourages more blobs and less squads working in unison.

Re: Detection / Masking

Gwyndor wrote:

It should require a small squad to scout the flanks, not a module that gives you a huge warning where people are.  It encourages more blobs and less squads working in unison.

*I'm too lazy to explain my opinion in a meaningful way.*

Yep that's the whole point of the change isn't it?  To make other scouting roles viable and to reduce the amount of land that can be scouted in a given amount of time.  Effectively making the islands bigger and tactics more varied.

(Or you could and more islands and more ways on/off those islands but that's a whole other topic)

+1
-Confucius

Re: Detection / Masking

/me wonders when this goes finally live.

sure, fieldcontainer need a change in their masking value too or the masking changes on industrial bots are mostly useless.

they should also replace the mining bonus on termis and argano, or the yield bonus on laird with a masking or a considerable weapon bonus.

*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