Re: Robot balancing discussion

Why would anyone go roll the dice with the 57%/34% Random Number Generator when it's more effective to jump in a tuning-stacked mech or heavy and punch people in the face?

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

The Imperial Grand Wizard of Justice

Re: Robot balancing discussion

Syndic: I don't want to discourage you because you obviously invested the time, but that's pretty much the feedback that I wanted to avoid here.

What I mainly take away from your post is "XY is worthless because the way *I* want to fit it is not feasible against YZ".

But one thing we can agree on without a question is that module stacking is a problem.

28 (edited by Jasmoba 2014-12-15 19:01:30)

Re: Robot balancing discussion

DEV Zoom wrote:

Syndic: I don't want to discourage you because you obviously invested the time, but that's pretty much the feedback that I wanted to avoid here.

What I mainly take away from your post is "XY is worthless because the way *I* want to fit it is not feasible against YZ".

But one thing we can agree on without a question is that module stacking is a problem.



You don't like us to say X bot is useless.  But the true is with current mechanics there is no way a waspish will stop a baph or a arb from getting closer (speed) and destroying that shield.  Because tuning stacking?   But of course.  But also for plate no penalty (speed) stacking.  BTW wasp speed maybe the missile launchers are just to damn heavy ?

Maybe mass increase effect on mk2 was the problem ? (after the extra slot)

Some people are trying to defend the fact you cant be demob.  First time ever i seen in any game something that is 100 percent resistant to something 100 percent of the time.

The zenith MK1 has no range.  460m ? with out a nexus.  With nexus still terrible.  With range extender still terrible.  If you go with 460m range to a fight you are already dead.   Plus it really doesnt matter if you have 100 m or 1000m  the speed these fully plated bots can reach is unbeatable making the ewar useless.  No matter how many suppressors i got on you.  You just have to run to me get in range and 2 shot me.

Some people want stack tunings online but as you can see almost everybody of the player base that is left are not OK with this ptach

I have a green pilot account and is almost castel scout because I cant bring anything else and feel like I'm just a liability to the group.

Re: Robot balancing discussion

You can't fit those bots any other way

Ictus = doesn't matter if you put Neuts or Drainers (drainers were worthless for 4 years, don't drain enough & too long cycletime), you gotta put shield hardeners otherwise insta-popped (masker is good option tho!), 1 Amp is default but vulnerable to suppression/ECM. Legs you have shield & frame as must-haves, other two slots either go to x2 enwar tunings or injector/evasive or injector/tuning. There's nothing else to fit that gives more tangible benefit then those combinations.

Waspish = With just 4 launchers(!) and a DPS-oriented load-out (amp+tunings out of the ***) with a shield & frame, JUST as fast as the arbalest except weak to demob & arby wrecks it when it closes gap (optimal is ~200M with smite, demob range on Arby is 195m, so only 1 mis-step and youre eating magnedarts for dinner)

Gropho = Long range is pointless because trees and speed so RE's are out of the question (also you hit like WORTHLESS against those 12k - 20k armor), weapontunings compromise your tank to the point where putting a shield on is a waste of a module (1 mesmer will 2-4 shot through the shield by itself), or if you stack hardeners you'll still get punched in the face because shields don't have resists they take the entire dmg then mitigate it via hardeners so it's not as effective as armor-tanking.

All of them are succeptible to demob btw.

Difference between shield-tanked gropho and armor-tanked seth is 10kph. Except the Gropho has to cycle shield to lob missiles, seth just lets autocannons/lasers go and walks in. 12k armor too stronk kappa madafaka!

Theoretically you can bring EW to try and lock down the heavy, but it can't be demobbed and it has a sh*tload of armor, so all it takes is that 34% RNG to miss once and someone's dying. Otherwise it just walks back to the gate at a comfortable 95 and jumps out. Can't stop it, can't lock it, can't do anything except get a bigger pile of heavies and drop it on top of it.

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

The Imperial Grand Wizard of Justice

30 (edited by Burial 2014-12-15 22:06:29)

Re: Robot balancing discussion

@Syndic: EW isn't supposed to be RNG-ing superior against everything every single time. What's the point of taking risks and trying different compositions if EW is superior against everything?

Weapon tunings go to the same slots as ECCM and amps. Armor repair tuners go to the same slots as ECCM and amps. If a bot fits for EW resistance and it's tuners use head slots, it's losing effectiveness.

Full tuner Mesmer MK2: 5 tuners it's 500dps. Suppressor lands 100%, ECM 78%. Same Mesmer MK2 with 2 tuners, 2 amps, 1 ECCM - 340dps, suppressor still lands 70%(and *** him up) and ECM 41%(cherry on top).

Every EW mech can have up to 6 EW modules and still hit 677m optimal with EW nexus.

@Devs: 1) Look into Suppressors. The -locking speed is impossible to counter with amps. 2) Fix your %-based tuner stacking. Last tuner should have the same bonus as the first.

Re: Robot balancing discussion

Thanks, that's more useful info.

Btw slightly off topic but here's my take on what happened:
1. Before the patch a lot of the modules were unused due to bad balance, and there were very few ways to competitively fit the robots with the remaining modules.
2. People basically accepted that there were one or two ways at most to fit a certain robot and were happy that it all worked fine, even if it was boring as hell.
3. The patch tried to diversify the way robots can be fitted.
4. This effectively destroyed those few "best" fits.
5. People are still stuck in the past and are desperately trying to fit the robots based on their hard-earned knowledge of those "best" fits.

And I completely understand this reaction, hell even I quit another game when they nerfed a very common but very lazy and lucrative playstyle. But they knew and we knew that if we let that lukewarm state of lazy boredom go on for too long then people will quit anyway. Trying to make a change makes a lot of people angry, and yeah, maybe they quit. But for everyone else who doesn't live in that lazy veteran state of mind (no offence), it's probably a better game. At least once we work out the quirks.

Re: Robot balancing discussion

Since you already mentioned it - you should get rid of non-dimishing module stacking before you try to rebalance the game.

also, with offensive modules beeing either in torso or head slots, defensive ones either head or legslots - its a mess when you have robots number of availiable head and leg slots differ so much. (6 head and legslots on mesmer mk2, vs. 2 head+3 leg slots on a light bot)

*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

Re: Robot balancing discussion

I actually think the game was very well balanced before the patch. We had five Seth fits including a nifty shield one so I don't think it was cookie cutter at all. Mechs in particular only just evolved to buffer fits.

What was unusued were proto bots, seven tiers of weaponry and guns. The missed opportunity was making these viable.

Re: Robot balancing discussion

So as the first action that we seem to agree on, we'll try the separate anti-demob module and remove demob effects from armor and lwf. You'll see this soon on the test server.

35 (edited by Nooodlzs 2014-12-15 20:42:23)

Re: Robot balancing discussion

DEV Zoom wrote:

Thanks, that's more useful info.

Btw slightly off topic but here's my take on what happened:
1. Before the patch a lot of the modules were unused due to bad balance, and there were very few ways to competitively fit the robots with the remaining modules.
2. People basically accepted that there were one or two ways at most to fit a certain robot and were happy that it all worked fine, even if it was boring as hell.
3. The patch tried to diversify the way robots can be fitted.
4. This effectively destroyed those few "best" fits.
5. People are still stuck in the past and are desperately trying to fit the robots based on their hard-earned knowledge of those "best" .

1. those modules are still not getting used, drainers anyone? although I do admit theory crafting with some of the Nexus modules is interesting, lower EP players still need to concentrate on core skills before even thinking about the more exotic modules, after the patch those core skills are still more important.



2. You had a lot more choice fitting bots pre patch, now it is DPS or GTF, ewar runs out of accumulator after a few cycles and that is on top of the lower RNG nature of them, Enwar will run out of accumulator before it has done it's job on ONE heavy.

3. Only on 3 or 4 bots which are now FOTM, everything else is pretty subpar, even then there is one cookie cutter fit which EVERYONE is using, check kill boards, maybe you think this May have diversified PVE but it has wrecked PVP.

4. No, those fits are still viable on the FOTM bots.

5. I'm not stuck in the past at all, just stupid putting all my EP into a bot that probably takes the most EP in game to maximise that is now just a distraction at best.


You have actually made the choice of modules for DPS bots set in stone, now they don't need to fit reactor sealings or ECCM anymore ( which they didn't anyway but now they have become redundant modules)

As Syndic put it, why bring anything but DPS, they are much more effective because they now have no counters, it's become tuners online.

Re: Robot balancing discussion

Nooodlzs wrote:

2. You had a lot more choice fitting bots pre patch, now it is DPS or GTF, ewar runs out of accumulator after a few cycles and that is on top of the lower RNG nature of them, Enwar will run out of accumulator before it has done it's job on ONE heavy.

Again, I can't really react to these kind of statements unless I know what exactly are you talking about. What kind of ewar fit runs out of accumulator after a few cycles? What type of ewar is it in the first place? Why can't you help with rechargers?

Re: Robot balancing discussion

well im not that active since the patch, and i havent used the forums much either, but this seams a more or less civilized topic so maybe its worth a try.

not sure about the arbalest but i think its about a combination of plates with a frame that makes it fast and demob immune.
so maybe a change in the formula would be of intrest that one plate and one frame will cancel each other out so that its no benefit to have both.
or even that you cant have both at the same time.
since the two modules are basicly the oposite of each other, but current mechanics still provide options to use them effectivly in combination.
just an idea...

for tuners: (i think i said it before)
MAKE THEM LINEAR. no dimishing returns.
at the moment they stack exponential. that was a stupid idea from the start (sry)...
reduce the tuner to ONE benefit. for weapon tunings that would be dmg. then rewrite your formula that all boni simple add %. additive. if your gun is 100% then a bonus of 20% + a bonus of 5% + a bonus of 12% is simple 137% and not something way higher just because of a way more complex formula.

then you basicly just have to figure how much bonus you want to have. that includes extentions ... ...
set a min and a max, and look where you numbers get you. from there you can easy tweak. and just for example for pve it might stll make sense to add more tuners because its worth some. but not one tuner more is a too big difference. thats just because the boni are given exponential.... math my friends, math...

38 (edited by Burial 2014-12-15 23:16:15)

Re: Robot balancing discussion

@Zoom:

1) Should any 3-low light be able to make itself demob immune with 2 new modules and a frame?
2) Is it possible to base the demob resistance bonus from the surface size of the bot?

The way I see it, the module should weight around 500kg (close to a T4 light plate) with any 3-low light being demob immune(57% needed) by fitting 2(30% per). As for assaults, they have more slots, so they’d need 3(20% per) for immunity with the exception of 2 for Arbalest since it gets the bot bonus.

The rationale behind it is that if the module weights more than a decent tank, any demob immune bot can be caught speed-wise by equivalent tanky bot with plates/resists. Immune bots have superior mobility and weaker tank and vulnerable bots have superior tank and weaker mobility. Bigger bots are excluded since they can't catch them.

The problem is the bots that'd benefit the most have the least amount of low slots, hence to base the bonus from the surface size. The smaller the surface size, the bigger the effect. Mechs and heavies should have the bonus at 15% per module.

Sure, it has balancing issues like demob immune Detectors and the likes, but the main idea is: if you give players the ability to build demob immune lights and assaults, you give players the ability to force light and assault fights, as long as they're fast enough not to get caught by speed-fit mechs and heavies(145km/h Kain MK2 for example).

Re: Robot balancing discussion

DEV Zoom wrote:

Thanks, that's more useful info.

Btw slightly off topic but here's my take on what happened:
1. Before the patch a lot of the modules were unused due to bad balance, and there were very few ways to competitively fit the robots with the remaining modules.
2. People basically accepted that there were one or two ways at most to fit a certain robot and were happy that it all worked fine, even if it was boring as hell.
3. The patch tried to diversify the way robots can be fitted.
4. This effectively destroyed those few "best" fits.
5. People are still stuck in the past and are desperately trying to fit the robots based on their hard-earned knowledge of those "best" fits.

And I completely understand this reaction, hell even I quit another game when they nerfed a very common but very lazy and lucrative playstyle. But they knew and we knew that if we let that lukewarm state of lazy boredom go on for too long then people will quit anyway. Trying to make a change makes a lot of people angry, and yeah, maybe they quit. But for everyone else who doesn't live in that lazy veteran state of mind (no offence), it's probably a better game. At least once we work out the quirks.

From CIR77 side of things pre-patch the only robot that was considered "worthless" was Arbalest because of it's weak optimal range and necessity to sacrifice all the survivability for speed. At any given moment there were at least 4 different fits and their combinations for light EW's/assaults/EW mechs/heavies based on how we wanted to build a fleet.

We tried to make this patch work on the test server. Ictus is so destroyed I feel bad for all the guys who really enjoy flying that robot. EWar can be made to work, but with 12-14-16-20k buffer tanks you need to bring enough DPS to burn it down faster then it can run to the gate and jump out to Alpha, so no point being able to neutralize someone with EW if you don't have the DPS to kill them.

If the current situation was different but good , nobody would be complaining. Right now when a green-combat + 3 miner-account owner comes online only thing I can tell him is to come as a remote repairer because he's worthless in our fleets as a green robot. It's sad and it's humiliating, but green bots are kinda the armor-drake of Perp right now because they're the only race forced to sacrifice DPS tuning slots to buff their tank. The other two races can buff DPS and tank at the same time, that's a huge disbalance right now.

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

The Imperial Grand Wizard of Justice

Re: Robot balancing discussion

Burial wrote:

@Zoom:

1) Should any 3-low light be able to make itself demob immune with 2 new modules and a frame?
2) Is it possible to base the demob resistance bonus by the surface size of the bot?

The way I see it, the module should weight around 500kg (close to a T4 light plate) with any 3-low light being demob immune(57% needed) by fitting 2(30% per). As for assaults, they have more slots, so they’d need 3(20% per) for immunity with the exception of 2 for Arbalest since it gets the bot bonus.

The rationale behind it is that if the module weights more than a decent tank, any demob immune bot can be caught speed-wise by equivalent tanky bot with plates/resists. Immune bots have superior mobility and weaker tank and vulnerable bots have superior tank and weaker mobility. Bigger bots are excluded since they can't catch them.

The problem is the bots that'd benefit the most have the least amount of low slots, hence to base the bonus from the surface size. The smaller the surface size, the bigger the effect. Mechs and heavies should have the bonus at 15% per module.

Sure, it has balancing issues like demob immune Detectors and the likes, but the main idea is: if you give players the ability to build demob immune lights and assaults, you give players the ability to force light and assault fights, as long as they're fast enough not to get caught by speed-fit mechs and heavies(145km/h Kain MK2 for example).

NO BOT SHOULD BE DEMOB IMMUNE.

I agree there should be layers of immunity but that DEMOB should have varying effectiveness on EVERY bot but it should ALWAYS slow it down.

Re: Robot balancing discussion

Syndic wrote:
DEV Zoom wrote:

Thanks, that's more useful info.

Btw slightly off topic but here's my take on what happened:
1. Before the patch a lot of the modules were unused due to bad balance, and there were very few ways to competitively fit the robots with the remaining modules.
2. People basically accepted that there were one or two ways at most to fit a certain robot and were happy that it all worked fine, even if it was boring as hell.
3. The patch tried to diversify the way robots can be fitted.
4. This effectively destroyed those few "best" fits.
5. People are still stuck in the past and are desperately trying to fit the robots based on their hard-earned knowledge of those "best" fits.

And I completely understand this reaction, hell even I quit another game when they nerfed a very common but very lazy and lucrative playstyle. But they knew and we knew that if we let that lukewarm state of lazy boredom go on for too long then people will quit anyway. Trying to make a change makes a lot of people angry, and yeah, maybe they quit. But for everyone else who doesn't live in that lazy veteran state of mind (no offence), it's probably a better game. At least once we work out the quirks.

From CIR77 side of things pre-patch the only robot that was considered "worthless" was Arbalest because of it's weak optimal range and necessity to sacrifice all the survivability for speed. At any given moment there were at least 4 different fits and their combinations for light EW's/assaults/EW mechs/heavies based on how we wanted to build a fleet.

We tried to make this patch work on the test server. Ictus is so destroyed I feel bad for all the guys who really enjoy flying that robot. EWar can be made to work, but with 12-14-16-20k buffer tanks you need to bring enough DPS to burn it down faster then it can run to the gate and jump out to Alpha, so no point being able to neutralize someone with EW if you don't have the DPS to kill them.

If the current situation was different but good , nobody would be complaining. Right now when a green-combat + 3 miner-account owner comes online only thing I can tell him is to come as a remote repairer because he's worthless in our fleets as a green robot. It's sad and it's humiliating, but green bots are kinda the armor-drake of Perp right now because they're the only race forced to sacrifice DPS tuning slots to buff their tank. The other two races can buff DPS and tank at the same time, that's a huge disbalance right now.

Thank you Syndic, you have put it far more eloquently than I ever could, because I am that red headed stepchild and, yes, I do feel useless and all this had made me do is play less.

42 (edited by Burial 2014-12-15 22:50:13)

Re: Robot balancing discussion

Syndic wrote:

..  Gropho ..

Gropho is not a brawling bot. It's always been like that. If they make it sturdy as a brawling bot, it's going to be unbeatable at ranged fights.

It's not like it gets speed-hit like Seth and Mesmer for over-tanking. If the shield-tank gets boosted, it's still going to move at 115+ km/h.

Also, Gropho can improve the tank from leg slots just fine: add accumulator mods.

43 (edited by Nooodlzs 2014-12-15 22:53:46)

Re: Robot balancing discussion

Burial wrote:
Syndic wrote:

..  Gropho ..

Gropho is not a brawling bot. It's always been like that. If they make it sturdy as a brawling bot, it's going to be unbeatable at ranged fights because of the missile trajectory and plants.

It's not like it gets speed-hit like Seth and Mesmer for over-tanking. If the shield-tank gets increased it's still going to move at 115+ km/h.

Also, Gropho can improve the tank from leg slots just fine - add accumulator mods.

Once again you are missing the point, you give up leg slots for tank to compete with the other two factions that  utilise those same legs for stabs or whatever, still having to cycle shield.

It seems to me that green bots are the the faction that you cross train into ONCE you have trained one of the other two, good defence, terrible offence.

Re: Robot balancing discussion

Nooodlzs wrote:

Once again you are missing the point, you give up leg slots for tank to compete with the other two factions that  utilise those same legs for stabs or whatever, still having to cycle shield.

It seems to me that green bots are the the faction that you cross train into ONCE you have trained one of the other two, good defence, terrible offence.

All I'm saying is to be careful with adjusting Grophos. Shield tank retains consistent speed with over-tanking and missiles are least affected by terrain and plants.

Grophos are not for brawling and Grophos shouldn't be judged against brawlers.

Re: Robot balancing discussion

Zortarg wrote:

not sure about the arbalest but i think its about a combination of plates with a frame that makes it fast and demob immune.
so maybe a change in the formula would be of intrest that one plate and one frame will cancel each other out so that its no benefit to have both.

Yes, we could do that, if we change the LWF to have a straight subtractive value to mass and armor.

This would make them less effective on bigger robots (you decide whether that's good or bad, I think it's good), and we could probably even remove the 1 LWF per robot rule as well.

Re: Robot balancing discussion

Burial wrote:

Grophos are not for brawling and Grophos shouldn't be judged against brawlers.

You can say the same for Tyrannos and waspish, so tell me, what are green bots good for now, forget about Ictus because they can't do *** before they are accumulator dry now.

Re: Robot balancing discussion

Good to see the community coming together ITT. We can work it out!

Personally, I'll adapt & overcome any patch. There are ALWAYS important jobs to be done in an MMO despite FOTM roles.

Productivity and dominancy cannot always be glorious for every individual at all times.

There has been an awakening... Have you felt it?

48 (edited by Burial 2014-12-15 23:33:35)

Re: Robot balancing discussion

Tyrannos was a great brawler. Incredible shield and two neuts/drainers on top of the 4 missile launchers. Issue back then was reactor, so I fitted it head-to-toe with different prototype gear. Lost potency over using T4 was more than made up by it's absurdly great shield tank.

Now that the tank got a nerf, I think Tyrannos needs more reactor to fit more T4.

Re: Robot balancing discussion

DEV Zoom wrote:

So as the first action that we seem to agree on, we'll try the separate anti-demob module and remove demob effects from armor and lwf. You'll see this soon on the test server.

You see this is what people mean when they say kneejerk.

The current lwf and armor penalties are fine and work with lwf giving you a boost for a risk and armor giving you a benefit for a penalty. The problem is your patch that added bonus to demob resistance to the arbalast and mechs. Your going to bandaid your terrible patch by breaking a working mechanic that was balanced. That's just nuts.

Re: Robot balancing discussion

Perceptor wrote:
DEV Zoom wrote:

So as the first action that we seem to agree on, we'll try the separate anti-demob module and remove demob effects from armor and lwf. You'll see this soon on the test server.

You see this is what people mean when they say kneejerk.

The current lwf and armor penalties are fine and work with lwf giving you a boost for a risk and armor giving you a benefit for a penalty. The problem is your patch that added bonus to demob resistance to the arbalast and mechs. Your going to bandaid your terrible patch by breaking a working mechanic that was balanced. That's just nuts.

+1

You either die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become the villain.