Topic: Dimishing Returns

We need it!

the only game mechanic that has real dimishing returns built in, is the resist formula.

anything else is either linear or exponential stacking, or because of lack of DR capped at max 1 or 2 (unique module, ewar)

*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: Dimishing Returns

+1

+1
-Confucius

Re: Dimishing Returns

+1

Would love to see this put in and unique module fitting removed. i.e. lwf, ERP etc.

John 3:16 - Timothy 2:23

Re: Dimishing Returns

1+

Re: Dimishing Returns

+1

6 (edited by Mark Zima 2012-01-14 15:11:17)

Re: Dimishing Returns

-1
I'll repeat my answer from a different thread:
Introducing "diminishing returns" for modules like tunings, range exteners and such will just kill fitting variery and freedom, because the best choice will always be "fit one of each for max effect".

Don't use shield tank problems as an excuse to just nerf everything. Current fitting system is very good. You can put pretty much any combination of ew/dmg/rep/range mods into the head slots and it will make sense (at least in some situations and setups). Diminishing returns will skew it towards "max 1 of each" or "max 2 of each" which will greatly reduce the number of viable/possible combinations.

Re: Dimishing Returns

the non dimishing returns math in perp limits freedom of choice.

The only ingame mechanic that has built in dimishing returns is the Resistance. And well... mark zima - if your statement would be true, then any build with more then 1 universal armor plate would be fail.

dimshing returns is not "hardcap" like you see with demobs and supressor, where more then two is simply ignored.
dimishing returns means that any additional module does not give you the same or even more bonus then the first one.

*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: Dimishing Returns

2 universals are kinda fail indeed. Universal+specific hardener, universal+plate or just 2 hardeners would be better in most cases.

Soft cap or hard cap, variety in fitting will be reduced, and therefore variety in combat too. Is there an objective reason to mess with a perfectly working system?

Re: Dimishing Returns

Maybe instead of diminishing returns, tunings could come with a bonus and a penalty.

For example:
Bonus - Mining Amount Increase +10%
Penalty - Mining Module Acuumulator Usage +10%

Re: Dimishing Returns

I see your point Kaldenines. I would be for this if the Devs could balance it properly and if it gave more fitting options instead of less.

Looking forward to new players and new conflicts.

Re: Dimishing Returns

Mark Zima wrote:

2 universals are kinda fail indeed. Universal+specific hardener, universal+plate or just 2 hardeners would be better in most cases.

Soft cap or hard cap, variety in fitting will be reduced, and therefore variety in combat too. Is there an objective reason to mess with a perfectly working system?

Stacking penalties (that is what this really is) will just cause all the carebears to shed massive tears as they can't farm spawns like they used to.

Stacking penalties will encourage cookie cutter fits for PVP. It removes the originality of fittings period....

As a whole I agree with Zima yet again. The system works. Leave it alone.

Inappropriate signature.

Re: Dimishing Returns

tell my some fits that have a kind of originality atm...

*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: Dimishing Returns

Mark Zima wrote:

-1
I'll repeat my answer from a different thread:
Introducing "diminishing returns" for modules like tunings, range exteners and such will just kill fitting variery and freedom, because the best choice will always be "fit one of each for max effect".

Don't use shield tank problems as an excuse to just nerf everything. Current fitting system is very good. You can put pretty much any combination of ew/dmg/rep/range mods into the head slots and it will make sense (at least in some situations and setups). Diminishing returns will skew it towards "max 1 of each" or "max 2 of each" which will greatly reduce the number of viable/possible combinations.

exactly. nothing more needs to be said.

Re: Dimishing Returns

If we do not get diminishing returning the way bonuses work needs to be changed. At the moment it's better to fit more of one module and rely on a support robot for things like sensor amplification or energy or repair.

This means that for PvE the best thing to do is have a combat doing pure damage and a support robot helping.

If we're allowed to stack almost any module like we can now the bonus should be linear and not apply the new bonus to the old bonus. This is reducing complex fittings. If I could only fit 2 tunings but have them more powerful than current tunings I would then be able to choose something else to fit.

This is very different from PVP where you have to focus on range and tanking rather than DPS but for PvE it's very boring. PVP could be spiced up with either module limiting (I am against this) or very small bonuses from more than 2 of the same modules. First module gives one bonus, second module gives more bonus, third module gives almost no bonus, 4th gives nothing.. etc.. (I support this ONLY if all bonuses get a increase in strength)

Re: Dimishing Returns

dont forget that this will also affect your industrial tunings.. so dont come later with the tail between your legs complaining that the general mining ammount has been redused drasticly with this...

besides i dont see anything wrong with this pve dps builds. besides a lot ppl still tank npcs by range nad not by armor. so this max build is not everywhere to be found.
if you have a supporter there still is the question if 2 combat bots would be more efficient... and so on. so dont compare a build on a single mech with a mech with a supparter. so you compare a one bot build with a 2 bot build...

so i still see no need for this besides reducing the fitting varity.

Re: Dimishing Returns

Syrissa wrote:

dont forget that this will also affect your industrial tunings.. so dont come later with the tail between your legs complaining that the general mining ammount has been redused drasticly with this...

besides i dont see anything wrong with this pve dps builds. besides a lot ppl still tank npcs by range nad not by armor. so this max build is not everywhere to be found.
if you have a supporter there still is the question if 2 combat bots would be more efficient... and so on. so dont compare a build on a single mech with a mech with a supparter. so you compare a one bot build with a 2 bot build...

so i still see no need for this besides reducing the fitting varity.

How does it reduce what we already have now? There is very little variety as it stands. However as I previously said, if this were to be added it would mean that modules would need a bonus to compensate and we'd see more variety in modules being fitted.

17 (edited by Syrissa 2012-01-16 00:31:02)

Re: Dimishing Returns

my combat char has quite a varity of fits for pve.

factors are as always:
skill levels
type of enemy - race / lights / mechs
short range / long range / med range (dependent on the spawn)
choice of weapons - em / autocannon
tank - range / armor / shield (ok shiled not in my case)
team play / solo play
...

and some builds would not be possible if you bring your dimishing returns. i did not like it in the other game. i would not like it here. in the other game it was nessessary. here it is not. you can specialize in mass dps, but then you have other weak points. i think its good as it is. probably a lot others think the same way. and i have not seen any pvp inballance with that, as it have been pointed out anyway.

18 (edited by Alexander 2012-01-16 07:59:32)

Re: Dimishing Returns

Syrissa wrote:

my combat char has quite a varity of fits for pve.

factors are as always:
skill levels
type of enemy - race / lights / mechs
short range / long range / med range (dependent on the spawn)
choice of weapons - em / autocannon
tank - range / armor / shield (ok shiled not in my case)
team play / solo play
...

Then you're doing it wrong.. Long Range / Short range in PVP is just switching weapons to their long or short type.. Not a big move.. Robots look the same.

I have two, maybe three at most, builds that I use for everything. Close and tank, range and speed. Out ranging the enemy means keeping a distance and DPS'ing the enemy to death means taking a few hits. My third final fitting is "Super Tank" but it's hardly better than tank and anything that needs me to use it is usually a waste because I've not really helped at all by the time I get to where I want to be. So at the moment we have a few fittings, up to three, for each robot. I am talking about letting players mix it up even more.

At the moment to fit an ECCM I have to reduce my DPS which effects how much damage I take which means I need more tank or more range. I am rewarded at the moment as the more tunings I add the more increase I get from each one. This gives me the option of "Fit for what could happen" or "Fit what works" and 9 times out of 10 killing the enemy before it shoots you is the best option. Tanking for any period of time (Unless shield tanking) has been made almost impossible in this game which is fine but then don't expect people to fit anything interesting to their robots.

Re: Dimishing Returns

i see your point that you want to bring some more modules onto your fits but you see no big enough bonus for it because you have to downgrade your dps or range because the benefit of the other modules will not be big enough or the disadvantage for not having the tunings will be too big.

but i think the dimishing returns are the wrong way if you want that. there might be other ways, but either way it will be a lot of work to do and ballance it.

one way i can think of that you break down the slot types you have in more categories. how that will work will have to be figured out.

Re: Dimishing Returns

An idea I presented many months back, was for the next Tier of items to be multi-purpose.

So, something like a T5 Module would be a T1 ECCM and a T1 Demob, in one module (for example). Players would gain an extra module slot, at the expense of using a specialized T4, and then something like a T8 would be T4 of both.

In something like this, you would want DR, since you could in theory end up stacking effects with multiple T5 modules.