Re: Gamma Balancing

Gunner wrote:

Steam Greenlight 2015

So optimistic big_smile

The theory of mutual interests
Why the crybabies wins?
Где Ханя - там победа (с)
DEV Zoom: No need to speculate...

177 (edited by Goffer 2014-01-21 08:30:43)

Re: Gamma Balancing

Actually I like to see the big picture before finally judging.
ATM don't really get what you intend with change, hope you mange to change that soon.

The picture I see atm is:
- Terraform will be nerfed to a extrem extend. You can't build walls of mrodor anymore, thats good, but not beeing able to terraform slope that can block assault means that base will be extrem vulnerable.
ATM even good bases are too vulnerable and that will increase? Just to avoid island walling is the wrong way.

- The reasons for gamma bases will vanish, if even major blocks will no longer be able to defend their bases (no block is strong enough to have that more player to block an consolidated attack at weak time slot). The only benefit I see left is production with best possible facilities.
In fact one neutral gamma base could provide this for most player. No reason for gamma base -> wasted gamma islands, as only left will be solo player hunting for artifacts.

- All issues transfered to alpha, nice present. Wish would have got this at Bergers Island. We evacuated for sure more than 100kU by Scarabs and there was still enough left, not to speak about buildings. Not many corps would be able to evac their base atm complete by their own.
But what use will be afterwards for the evaced buildings?

Without buildings, why mine any longer colix? The colixium for 1 T3 Terminal would be sufficient to provide each corp member scarab mk2 if needed.

Re: Gamma Balancing

Which is why goffer they need to buff gamma in the ways described in the thread to compensate.

Re: Gamma Balancing

I would personally add a reinforcement to literally every structure in the game. That way the defenders have 3 days to get their sh*t together at a time suitable for them.

Re: Gamma Balancing

Burial wrote:

I would personally add a reinforcement to literally every structure in the game. That way the defenders have 3 days to get their sh*t together at a time suitable for them.

^ This.

181 (edited by Norrdec 2014-01-21 13:04:40)

Re: Gamma Balancing

3 days to alarmclock is essentially Intrusion 1.0, might as well get rid of Intrusion 2.0 too.

<GargajCNS> we maim to please

182

Re: Gamma Balancing

Sure, why not, Intrusion 2.0 is crappy anyway.

Have a productive day, runner!
R.I.P. Chenoa, you'll never be forgotten.
DEV Zoom: Line, sorry, I was away for christmas.
http://perp-kill.net/?m=view&id=252086

183

Re: Gamma Balancing

Burial wrote:

I would personally add a reinforcement to literally every structure in the game. That way the defenders have 3 days to get their sh*t together at a time suitable for them.


24 hour Reinforce to structures is good enough its risk vs reward remember. all terminals still have *** amount of timers. This all needs to go to an eve style of items in base = time till of reinforcement up to 48 hours. If its not attacked and repped back up when exiting reinforcement it gets its timer back up. No early repairing.

Anonymous: lobo is the only hero left in this god foresaken game / :also, Lobo is god among men
http://killboard.sequer.nl/?a=agent-his … mp;month=7 Best month 104 to 1 k/d

Re: Gamma Balancing

Martha Stuart wrote:

Question.

So we have all heard all of these plans in the last 2 months.  In what sequence can we expect to see all of this? So far i am expecting spark tele nerfs, gamma wipes, mission patch, etc etc. how and in what order are we gonna see this?  are we talking days on the gamma wipe or weeks? months?  When is spark nerf coming?

The timeline depends on how testing goes, but right now the priority is the new tutorial, then gamma, and things for Steam. The small things like spark teleport and followbot can be put in either of these patches.

If by "mission patch" you mean stage 2 of the assignment system, that was always slated for after Steam, that's why it was split in the first place.

185 (edited by Lemon 2014-01-21 15:56:53)

Re: Gamma Balancing

DEV Zoom wrote:
Martha Stuart wrote:

Question.

So we have all heard all of these plans in the last 2 months.  In what sequence can we expect to see all of this? So far i am expecting spark tele nerfs, gamma wipes, mission patch, etc etc. how and in what order are we gonna see this?  are we talking days on the gamma wipe or weeks? months?  When is spark nerf coming?

The timeline depends on how testing goes, but right now the priority is the new tutorial, then gamma, and things for Steam. The small things like spark teleport and followbot can be put in either of these patches.

If by "mission patch" you mean stage 2 of the assignment system, that was always slated for after Steam, that's why it was split in the first place.

I won't claim to be current on the happenings of his since I have not played but I have followed the forums. You guys seem to be finally making decisions but don't forget older lessons learned.

I worked closesly with dev crm and Alf in regards to the limits of followbots and 3rd party tools to manage them. The changes proposed in that thread will be a nerf to everyone but 3rd party users. if you seriously want to work to fix it let us know so we can show you just as I did others how we the players can and will break the system, so you can prepare for it.

This is what needs to happen with gamma, player dev team work to achieve your goal. What do you envision as gamma life, we know what it is. tell us the players how you want it, take our opinions and move forward achieve it.

zoom it's time to pull the curtain back and fix everything right once.

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: Gamma Balancing

The gamma and spark patch should go hand in hand as it will lessen the impact.

In three months this game might be worth playing again.

Re: Gamma Balancing

DEV Zoom wrote:

The small things like spark teleport and followbot can be put in either of these patches.

What are the issues with these two items? Are Spark Teleports broken, or...? And do we want to add, or remove, the ability to follow other robots? Right now you can approach them and that is sort of like following them, right?

Re: Gamma Balancing

They have their own topics:

http://forums.perpetuum-online.com/topi … -mechanic/
http://forums.perpetuum-online.com/topi … with-poll/

189

Re: Gamma Balancing

Sieges wrote:
DEV Zoom wrote:

The small things like spark teleport and followbot can be put in either of these patches.

What are the issues with these two items? Are Spark Teleports broken, or...? And do we want to add, or remove, the ability to follow other robots? Right now you can approach them and that is sort of like following them, right?

They are going to rebalance how many sparks you can have overall.

they plan to leave follow but make it unavailable on a locked target. This does limit the passive abuse of this but also indirectly buffs the offensive abuse of this with 3rd party tools.

Honestly if gamma is being reset, it requires a response well beyond what my phone will easily allow

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

190

Re: Gamma Balancing

There is no if gamma, its "when"

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: Gamma Balancing

Burial wrote:

I would personally add a reinforcement to literally every structure in the game. That way the defenders have 3 days to get their sh*t together at a time suitable for them.


I would suggest you add them to all structures, yet when turrets get incapped they go "offline" and cannot be onlined until they are fully repped.

Also the boost to turrets I was referring to was not a boost of damage but of survivability.

The Gifter
Top  Killer 2013  - 01: 334 -- 17 -- 317  : Merkle
Top  Killer 2012  - 01: 027 -- 472 -- 445 : Merkle

Scarab Kill Count - 13

Re: Gamma Balancing

Please don't incorporate wall units on the top of bland terraforming as the main walls of a base. Please leave the beacons and plans in, cap a vertical wall height at lets say 100 m, and any other slope at 30% .... this way you dont get these sheer 800 m ft walls, if someone wants an 800 m wall they will need to terraform a 4200 m base at a 30% slope in order to make the last vertical 100 m peak at 800 m.

This will also allow defensive vertical cover walls to be terraformed, still allowing base attacks.

Re: Gamma Balancing

Zoom doesnt want terraformed walls of any height.


Delcimus wrote:

Please don't incorporate wall units on the top of bland terraforming as the main walls of a base. Please leave the beacons and plans in, cap a vertical wall height at lets say 100 m, and any other slope at 30% .... this way you dont get these sheer 800 m ft walls, if someone wants an 800 m wall they will need to terraform a 4200 m base at a 30% slope in order to make the last vertical 100 m peak at 800 m.

This will also allow defensive vertical cover walls to be terraformed, still allowing base attacks.

194 (edited by Burial 2014-01-22 12:40:24)

Re: Gamma Balancing

What other design changes we will have besides terraforming nerf?

CPU and Reactor on terminals? How would that work out?

Building distance between terminals? 5000 meters?

Maximum terminal count changed on the island or just let it be dynamic? With 5000m between terminals, I doubt one could fit more than 5-6 terminals on an island.

Turrets changed so there's less spam of structures or let it work out with just CPU and Reactor on terminals?

How about this feature
First terminal built on an island has an option to disallow building other terminals on an island by any corporation. That way people don't necessarily need to aim for maximum amount of terminals on an island right away and have an easy way to allow more terminals to be built on an island by interested parties.

In order to build new terminal on an island, the terminal that disallows it needs to be either removed or the original terminal has to allow the corp to some sort of list.

195 (edited by Rage Rex 2014-01-22 13:01:59)

Re: Gamma Balancing

Burial wrote:

Maximum terminal count changed on the island or just let it be dynamic? With 5000m between terminals, I doubt one could fit more than 5-6 terminals on an island.

I too prefer a more dynamic mechanic for terminals. Any BASE CAP is artificial and can be exploited to help Turtle Island. Some distance requirement seems best approach. This could also make different islands have different appeals, especially with existing natural impassable terrain combined with new terraforming constraints.

Perhaps a distance minimum that changes depending on the Tier. More distance requirements the higher the Tier.

Perhaps even introduce different types of bases for colony establishment (Defensive) and Intrusive (offensive) bases. An offensive type of base would have much less capacity to place turrets, buildings, etc and have less distance requirements so that is can be placed on 'capped' islands. These are just thoughts. I'm not so informed on current base building mechanics.  But in general, the more dynamic, the better.

Best luck making these changes. I think some will get unhealthy windfall in the process but Terraforming in current form is Terrabad.

196 (edited by Burial 2014-01-22 13:10:22)

Re: Gamma Balancing

Rage Rex, I love the defensive/offensive terminal idea. At the same time, I would still like the first terminal to have the ability to block any more defensive terminals to be built on an island. I suggest it because even with the 5000m limit, new gamma colonists will still need to get the island filled ASAP which isn't very good or risk being overran overnight.

197 (edited by Delcimus 2014-01-22 16:56:06)

Re: Gamma Balancing

Burial wrote:

What other design changes we will have besides terraforming nerf?

CPU and Reactor on terminals? How would that work out?

Building distance between terminals? 5000 meters?

Maximum terminal count changed on the island or just let it be dynamic? With 5000m between terminals, I doubt one could fit more than 5-6 terminals on an island.

Turrets changed so there's less spam of structures or let it work out with just CPU and Reactor on terminals?

How about this feature
First terminal built on an island has an option to disallow building other terminals on an island by any corporation. That way people don't necessarily need to aim for maximum amount of terminals on an island right away and have an easy way to allow more terminals to be built on an island by interested parties.

In order to build new terminal on an island, the terminal that disallows it needs to be either removed or the original terminal has to allow the corp to some sort of list.

"First terminal disallows any other  ..."

So take over a Gamma island with one Terminal?  I see what would happen 10 minutes after Gamma reset.

I think a combination of placement distance and terminal TYPES should be a formula to determine what an island can bear.

Something like

Mining Terminal
Small, easy to construct, decon, limited connections, limited defensive connections, minimum reinforcement stages, higher structure masking

Outpost Terminal
Small, fast up, fast down, reasonable defensive connections, hard as crap to kill. Also to used as a Siege staging terminal for attacking forces

Settlement Terminal
The standard type of terminals we have today.

Perhaps instead of a hard cap on terminals maybe an island terminal value limit of example, 15 ... and Mining cost 1, Outpost 2, Settlement 3 ... meaning the average island thats being fully utilized could have 3 Settlements, 2 Outposts, 2 Mining.

The different types of Terminals will allow for more mobilty and different playstyles and uses on Gamma.

Just a thought.
From my experience a single Gamma Island can easily accomodate 2-3 corps and 30-50 active players.

198 (edited by Burial 2014-01-22 17:11:32)

Re: Gamma Balancing

Yes, that might happen, even though it would be quite hard to pull off continuously. The lock-out mechanic could be using some sort of commodity to operate and the container for that commodity would need to be filled weekly. When the commodity is not provided, island lock-down is taken away. Basically all I'm trying to fight here is the need to fully cap island terminals out in order to protect from enemy building their turreted base overnight.

About the terminal count vs terminal distance restrictions: I would prefer distance restriction because that way someone can not just build all their terminals stacked together into a turtle base. With distance checking all the terminals will be nicely spread apart and then I don't think any hard-cap on terminal count is needed- players can just figure out optimal placements for their needs.

Rage Rex's idea is great here imo. Defensive terminals need bigger terminal free area to place and are more powerful in terms of defenses it can fit and offensive terminals need smaller terminal free area but also allow weaker defenses. Brilliant!

Lots of good ideas in this thread.

Re: Gamma Balancing

Sorry I'm not addressing everything here, but there is a practical problem with limiting terminal placement based on range.

You don't know where the other terminals are.

If you would know, the location of the terminals could not be hidden anymore.

If you don't know, you would have to trial-and-error the WHOLE island when you are trying to place a terminal.

Re: Gamma Balancing

DEV Zoom wrote:

Sorry I'm not addressing everything here, but there is a practical problem with limiting terminal placement based on range.

You don't know where the other terminals are.

If you would know, the location of the terminals could not be hidden anymore.

If you don't know, you would have to trial-and-error the WHOLE island when you are trying to place a terminal.

Valid point I guess, but if you don't know there's another terminal within 5000 m of the one you're trying to place, you probably shouldn't be on gamma.  Good detector sees terminals around 4000 + ish now.