You are not logged in. Please login or register.
I would agree if every next tuning fitted had diminishing returns. So far (before patch) every next one gave proportionally more benefits than previous one. Therefore the more tunings you have already the less beneficial it is to fit anything else than yet another one. Old six T4 tuners tripled dps output. All that at no penalty and even tho acc stability took a hit with shorter cycles efficiency was actually rising.
Every heavy used to stack tunings. No diversity.
I'd take your argument if they were the same, but they aren't. The incentive here is to use T2+T3s instead of T4's almost always because the rate-of-increase.
ok, how often do you fit anything but a mk2 heavy mech for combat?
if you fit a kain with two tunings and a sensor amp,
you can fit your T2+T3 for 41% more DPS
you can fit two T4 fore 91% more DPS (at this point four gauss can probably one-shot lwf fitted targets)
you can fit 1 T4 EM, and 1 T4 repair tunigns for 40% more damage and 45% faster repair
your "incentive" is rather counterproductive, when it comes to kill things faster then them killing you.
and the higher production cost of a higher tier module is no balance factor - not for combat, only for your "risk vs. reward" calculation. If the server was brand new, and productioncost of items would actually mean something, it could be considered in "balancing"... but not in the long-term either, since noth enough robots explode with their modules fitted, compared to ho much overproduction you have.
Main thing isn't that T2+T3 better or worser than T4. It's about 2 modules vs 1.
Yes, please, go fit all to T2+T3 missing free slots for ECCM or Demobs or whatever. It's completely your problem what to fit.
Otherwise we will get the same "hey let's put all head to T4", just from other corner.
T1 is just a component, infinite, extremely easy to get. Its still viable for no negative efficiency.
T2 better than T1 becouse of weight, cpu and pg reduction (this allows better fits)
T3 is best for efficiency and T4 for effectiveness.
So comparing a fight between T4 and T3 = the longer the fight gets the more in favor of the T3 it becomes. So to my understanding a 1v1 with alot of running back and forth and hiding behind plants = T3 is a better choice. All out move in for "all or nothing" T4 is the best option.
If T4 gets negative efficiency it will become unviable as the magno and energy tuners are now. It cannot be super high damage but only for 1-2 shots or jumping a teleport into pvp island in anything but plated heavy mech will result in death whenever there is one or two enemies camping. Imagine the cries after a few of those. This should only be avaiable when there is more people willing to do insta poping.
EDIT: example fitting options for PvE after proposed changes:
1. T3 fit with all head slots for weapon tunings. Leg slots filled with 3 resistances 1 repairer and 2 acc rechargers.
2. T4 fit with all head slots for weapon tunings. 1 leg slot used for repairer and rest for accumulator rechargers to keep it as stable as T3 fit.
One is much tankier and other one does more dps if it aint obvious. T4 version does 35% more dps (with 6 tuners), T3 is almost twice as tanky (and often more than twice). I know I would use both options for various situations in PvE.
question to zoom:
NPCs will be affected by this too - but how?
their tunings will be T1 across the board?
looking at the repair tuners - will there be any ERP fits usable after that change? will repair modules get a similar treatments regarding their efficiency? (t4 burst repair, bad accumulator, t2 good repair, slower)
question to zoom: could you make different tiers of drainers have different cycletimes? with so much power beeing consumed, i would love to use that drainer slot on the mesmer for something - but a medium drainer with 10 seconds cycletime never worked well when you had killed your target in less then 20 seconds. the gain was same negliable.
have no LoS when that one cycle happened it was even a loss for you.
@mroq - given your last sentence, i take that as "it looks good on paper" ?
More like depending if solo or with logi. Sniping or tanking. Full attention or semi afk. Various situations call for verious fits.
Looks good on paper is what one can only hope for when theory crafting. Actual outcome cannot be predicted, and will never be able to calculate. Balanced numbers and percentages is what we can aim for at this stage. Testing in confined environment will not produce results either.
Concerns can be raised at this stage. My concern is eliminating any advantage of higher tier of modules. Efficiency loss at higher tiers. Insta killing builds (700%+ dmg increase) and firearms and missile bias.
If costs are not a factor for PvP then why don't we see only black heavy mechs fitted with all T4+ ?
...
If costs are not a factor for PvP then why don't we see only black heavy mechs fitted with all T4+ ?
you can't mass-produce these.
T4 and MK2's cost are in resources you can gather full or semi afk in huge quantities and zero risk.
These days, your corp research allows every agent to instantly craft T4,
EP for mass production (of Ammo) will unlock the necessary extensions to build them efficiently in no time, and steam sales allows for having lots of production alts.
we have seen that three active player can provide the whole server population with T4 equipment, even when it was more populated.
you would see the black heavys with t4+ en masse if you could still exploit the *** out of beacons.
regarding the favor of low-energy weapons -> i already suggested that some weapon tunings should increase DPS not by damage per shot, but by RoF (just make sure the result is the same)
last but not least, its a long term wish that shields are seperated from accumulator, and injector charges put back to their original cargo-SIZE - but that will never happed due to lack of DEV power
NIC and tokens can be gathered risk free too. Essentially one can produce those by grinding missions.
How can you afk grind cortexes for MK2?
T4 takes either triple or double time to produce than T2 (depending on either buying or producing T1).
Im not saying T4 should always be better than lower tiers as they are now. It shouldn't be negative efficiency.
How do You propose % on different tiers of tunings?
NIC and tokens can be gathered risk free too. Essentially one can produce those by grinding missions.
How can you afk grind cortexes for MK2?
T4 takes either triple or double time to produce than T2 (depending on either buying or producing T1).
Im not saying T4 should always be better than lower tiers as they are now. It shouldn't be negative efficiency.How do You propose % on different tiers of tunings?
well, that depends on your idea of efficiency. beeing kill targets faster always was more efficient, since you didn'T have to use your accumulator for repairs.
given that repair modules on mechs already startwith 70% efficiency, and the tuning rebalance pushes that further into the negative...
if just jita didn'T propose the size change for injector charges ...
T4 modules always must be better, better then t3 t2 t1. Remember it
I agree with inda, and have said this before about the new tuning system.
I don't understand (outside of perhaps implementation issues) that you can't have a diminishing returns system, instead of exponential penalty system.
There is no reason to choose to adversely affect the accumulator, vs any other system on the robot. Maybe they increase srf area, maybe they increase mass, maybe they eat exponentially more cpu or reactor...
So let's get back to WHY the tuning changes in the first place.
My understanding, and please let us know the true intent here Zoom, is that people were fitting all tunings for most every fit. The diversity of fits for PVE and PVP was limited because the stacking of tunings for dps was so valuable.
The goal here is to limit the ability for players to fit many tunings of the same type. (?) Please confirm.
IF that is true.
Why not just limit the number of the same type of tunings on a bot?
(like sensor amps, LWF, etc..)
How many? *** if I know... 3? Does that sound good?
No penalties, no weird *** ratios, a clear hierarchy from T1->T4, and max dps is capped and forces people to use empty head slots for other mods.
This way we can control the peak of the exponential curve of these modules, we get around the 'exploit' of using energy transfer to use the x^6 dps potential that some bots will have. And the raw number ensures that the dps modifier from a bot with more headslots will not exceed that of another bot with fewer available headslots (the reign of the seth mk2 max-tunings is again thwarted.)
Please tell me why this is bad and will destroy the game.
Regardless, you get away from all the fussy balancing, and you can focus on raw dps potentials, and balance that. Weapon systems are affected evenly (no base-accum to worry about). Everyone is happy again.
I still think that tunings should increase both applied and emitted interference.
I agree with inda, and have said this before about the new tuning system.
I don't understand (outside of perhaps implementation issues) that you can't have a diminishing returns system, instead of exponential penalty system.
one is just playing with numbers, the other one requires actual coding and messing with the fundamental combat mechanics. The later usually leads to bugs, the other one only to imbalancesThere is no reason to choose to adversely affect the accumulator, vs any other system on the robot. Maybe they increase srf area, maybe they increase mass, maybe they eat exponentially more cpu or reactor...
So let's get back to WHY the tuning changes in the first place.
My understanding, and please let us know the true intent here Zoom, is that people were fitting all tunings for most every fit. The diversity of fits for PVE and PVP was limited because the stacking of tunings for dps was so valuable.The goal here is to limit the ability for players to fit many tunings of the same type. (?) Please confirm.
IF that is true.
Why not just limit the number of the same type of tunings on a bot?
(like sensor amps, LWF, etc..)How many? *** if I know... 3? Does that sound good?
No penalties, no weird *** ratios, a clear hierarchy from T1->T4, and max dps is capped and forces people to use empty head slots for other mods.This way we can control the peak of the exponential curve of these modules, we get around the 'exploit' of using energy transfer to use the x^6 dps potential that some bots will have. And the raw number ensures that the dps modifier from a bot with more headslots will not exceed that of another bot with fewer available headslots (the reign of the seth mk2 max-tunings is again thwarted.)
Please tell me why this is bad and will destroy the game.
Regardless, you get away from all the fussy balancing, and you can focus on raw dps potentials, and balance that. Weapon systems are affected evenly (no base-accum to worry about). Everyone is happy again.
hard caps suck even more.
well, that depends on your idea of efficiency. beeing kill targets faster always was more efficient, since you didn'T have to use your accumulator for repairs.
Point taken. Would increase 18%/15% to 18%/18% (or maybe even 20%/20%?) on T4 becouse of it. No efficiency change (and no penalty).
...There is no reason to choose to adversely affect the accumulator, vs any other system on the robot...
T3 with 12%/5% are very similar in acc efficiency as tunings before the changes. Old T4 were 19.2%/7.5% (*).
2.4:1 on proposed T3 vs 2.56:1 on old T4. A ratio of 12%/4% on T3 would make it 3:1 = much more efficient than old tunings.
To have diminishing returns similar pattern to that of resistances would have to be used, thats alot more computation every time one shoots and would lag the game. Alot less variables (1 variable just to name it) involved in calculating resistance - before it is asked.
Limitations on number of modules would limit the number of different fits and scratch the whole idea WHY it is being made = to make other than 5-6 weapon tuning heavy mechs an option.
(*EDIT*) = that includes 3% critical hit (and calculates DPS/Acc not dmg/acc), should that be left on new tunings proposed T3 would be more efficient than old T4 as it is (12/5 would be 15/5 in that case).
does it really matter if the efficiency goes below a factor of 1?
To have diminishing returns similar pattern to that of resistances would have to be used, thats alot more computation every time one shoots and would lag the game. Alot less variables (1 variable just to name it) involved in calculating resistance - before it is asked.
actually, i dont know if it would increase server load - after all, you cannot turn those tunings on or off like resist plates (which would be another idea 
)
the server only needs to calculate youre damage mods once you deploy to terrain - or interact with a field terminal.
thats the reason why you need to dock for changes on your extensions (it didn't work right when it was still "allowed")
server load will be reduced allot with the change anyway, because 1s-cycletime MG seth's wont be possible anymore
important question to ZOOM - what are you plans for prototypes, with cycletime bonuses removed ?
btw,
the only "quick and dirty" way to have tunings get diminishing returns, would be to make them not incrase damage by x% but incresing the damage per shot by and absolute
that way, each additional tuning wil increase the overall damage by the same % and not more. due to accumulator still beeing multiplicative, the efficiency would drop the more modules you fit
NPCs will be affected by the tuning change of course. Most of them only use 1 or 2 T1 tunings which shouldn't mean too much difference. There are a few high ranked ones that use 4 or 5 T1 tunings, but I currently don't plan to change this. They will of course need different strategies to take down as they will hit harder at first, but their accumulator will drain fast.
With cycle time bonuses removed, prototype tunings will only have a fitting and mass advantage after the change.
does it really matter if the efficiency goes below a factor of 1?
It would matter for every fight that lasts more than few seconds. Remember that efficiency ratios scale exponentially.
With 50% dmg increase 6 tunings would increase DMG to 1139% how many robots can survive a volley like that from heavy mech? Accumulator consumption 170%^6 would be 2413% so it would probably be a "one shot wonder" build.
Now dont get me wrong. I'm all up for having a "killall" robot 1 shooting stuff and running to a group of energy transfer "buddies" for refill. Group of shooters taking out first few targets before the battle even begins. I'd love to have a bunch of heavies on teleports sweeping anyone who decides to have a peak. But will it help the balance?
PvE now is kind of weird. You let them high end npc shoot a few times and then they just sit there shooting a single gun every now and then.
I also have to say that i like how current situation encouraged active tanking builds and variety of head slots. Weapon tunings needed rebalance not removal tho.
Another thing that I would like to point out (that became prominent with recent changes) is the difference in efficiency between small and medium modules. With such drastic tuning changes we might begin to see heavies with light weapons (we already use small miners, harvesters and repairers).
Annihilator wrote:does it really matter if the efficiency goes below a factor of 1?
It would matter for every fight that lasts more than few seconds. Remember that efficiency ratios scale exponentially.
With 50% dmg increase 6 tunings would increase DMG to 1139% how many robots can survive a volley like that from heavy mech? Accumulator consumption 170%^6 would be 2413% so it would probably be a "one shot wonder" build.
Now dont get me wrong. I'm all up for having a "killall" robot 1 shooting stuff and running to a group of energy transfer "buddies" for refill. Group of shooters taking out first few targets before the battle even begins. I'd love to have a bunch of heavies on teleports sweeping anyone who decides to have a peak. But will it help the balance?
PvE now is kind of weird. You let them high end npc shoot a few times and then they just sit there shooting a single gun every now and then.
I also have to say that i like how current situation encouraged active tanking builds and variety of head slots. Weapon tunings needed rebalance not removal tho.
Another thing that I would like to point out (that became prominent with recent changes) is the difference in efficiency between small and medium modules. With such drastic tuning changes we might begin to see heavies with light weapons (we already use small miners, harvesters and repairers).
Just FYI: 1139% DMG isn't "one shot" even for Mesmer. Practice, my friend, practice!
well, it may be one-shot killk... if you fit all legslots with stabs to actually have all 6 guns hit, given the dispersion
well, it may be one-shot killk... if you fit all legslots with stabs to actually have all 6 guns hit, given the dispersion
Seth Mk2 with 6 EM tunings, 6 Gauss and 6 Stabs would be extremelly popular indeed
Annihilator wrote:well, it may be one-shot killk... if you fit all legslots with stabs to actually have all 6 guns hit, given the dispersion
Seth Mk2 with 6 EM tunings, 6 Gauss and 6 Stabs would be extremelly popular indeed
and extremely vulnerable to L-Demob 
if there wouldn't be those bottlenecks when you travel from one island to the other, or when you undock from a station...
Just FYI: 1139% DMG isn't "one shot" even for Mesmer. Practice, my friend, practice!
Thing about maths is you are either right or wrong.
Mesmer alpha dmg : 52 x 588% x 6 x 759% = 13924.31
Am I wrong?
[EDIT] F*** IT! MOAR NUMBERS!
SETH MK2, 6 firearms tunings, 6 machine guns.
(42 x 245.7% x 6 x 1139%) / 2.14s = 3295.46 DPS
(2 x 6 x 2414%) / 2.14s = 135.36 acc per second
6880 AP / 22.56 = 50.83s (not including acc regen)
3295.46 x 50.83 = 167508.23 damage before it runs dry (again if for some reason acc regen got turned off)
Line wrote:Just FYI: 1139% DMG isn't "one shot" even for Mesmer. Practice, my friend, practice!
Thing about maths is you are either right or wrong.
Mesmer alpha dmg : 52 x 588% x 6 x 759% = 13924.3104
Am I wrong?
22*265 = 5844 kinetic damage
10*265 = 2650 thermal
10*265 = 2650 seismic
10*265 = 2650 chemo
total 13.816 damage
vs. empty seth mk2 (6800 HP):
5844*0,38 (kinetic resists)= 2.220+
2650*0,62 (thermal resists)= 1643 +
2650*0,79 (seismic resists)= 2098 +
2650*0,68 (chemo resists)= 1802
total: 7763 damage
= theoretical one-shot.
with a single armor plate the SETH would have 9k+ hitpoints but also enough hitsize to have all hits land.
and the mesmer wilk have 1664 accumulator less
[EDIT] Or you know what.. I am not going to compare and calculate. Well too tired/sleepy for that. Going to come back after a few days of this mayhem and see if you figured out some really OP possibilities by then.
theoretical
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
Currently installed 3 official extensions. Copyright © 2003–2009 PunBB.
Generated in 0.063 seconds (79% PHP - 21% DB) with 19 queries
Copyright © Avatar Creations
