The Meta is dead, long live the Meta.

[Red-Xiii]

Of course you are going to defend this interaction you've created with Muse.  Otherwise it would be a waste of time.  So by all means.  Defend yourself and your testing group. 

IMO these balance changes ****ed things up awhile ago.  Its not IMPROVING the community.  It's far too much time wasted by people like yourself and Muse to nerf and buff things overall when noones doing A SINGLE THING to improve player retention.  Nothing.  Its acceptable for this small of a player base?  Its acceptable to have two lobbies in PVP at a time?  Sometimes one half filled?

Yes please continue to pour over your stat sheets, numbers, and exhaust your oh so busy schedule with these changes while the player base continues to suffer.  It will really matter what rof the gatling greased ammo has.   

[Naoura]

To answer the question of "overarching goals", all I want is a solid, definite plan for future releases. I've stated it several times in the past, if not on this post.

Guns has reached a kind of equilibrium, there's only so much you can add to GoIO. Only so many holes to fill. And after that comes balancing, or else something big and completely new.

Alliance was supposed to be more of the second. I'm... not sure if it accomplished it or not. It's definitely a strong attempt, but it has gone through so many additions, minor changes, little additions that I'm not certain that Muse ever had it fleshed out and planned accordingly in the first place. I still maintain the position that Muse did not plan for what they wanted to accomplish. Adventure mode wouldhave taken them years. Alliance still took them 2 years longer than planned.

So, in that, planning and full or partial disclosure of those plans are all I want. The community can respond to them how they like, but at least they can respond to what is in development, either from the Council or from the Devs themselves.

That's exactly why I recommended what I did, using all three in that order, just so that everyone can be on the same page, even those not part of certain pieces. I would love to be able to test more often, and give my opinion on the testing, but it is literally always scheduled when I have work. So I can't be there every time, even though I do want to see what the changes are and what they have accomplished.

As for reducing greased's effectiveness in only a few weapons... I'm on the fence on that. Targeting it to make the Vets happy is a noble  move, but I think it unfairly targets the weapons it is most effective in without offering any punishment on any other weapon. I'm not arguing with the decsion, only giving my opinion on what I see. I'll honestly have to see how Banshee works with Extended before I can pass judgement on whether or not it's still as viable at the ranges it used to be. It certainly means that a gunner will be swapping between lesmok and greased more often in gats, and that the Hades will see a resurgence, but I'm still not quite sure as of yet.

And Red, what do you propose they do? As I've said, there's only so much you can add where Guns is right now. The last ship that properly was added to Goio was the Mobula, as I still hold that Alliance and Skirmish should have been kept seperate. They can't effectively plan for what GoIO needs, especially since there's only so much they can add. In fact, I think keeping the two games seperate might have helped in that regard, as you could, effectively, have the Alliance side having 12 ships. 12! More than the bast game, and plenty to work and level for. And on the GoIO side, keep working on updates for maps, ships, and possible weapons. Alliance they can have the 12 and be done with it, let people grind themselves against it for a while, and take a break from AI fights to play with the tried and true ships, and then look forward to the updates that are in the pipe.

The introduction of the Alliance content is one thing I'm still highly against. We saw the utter and complete chaos of the Tempest when it was introduced blank and clean, a move I have the sneaking suspicion was the devs punishing the community screaming for the content to be ported over. But that simply goes right back to the lack of solid and defined planning, and I'd rather not talk in circles.

The only thing that can bring the numbers back up would be new updates, and I can see that the Council is trying. Desperately. They did introduce the Nemesis, the first new gun (Not imported) for years. The last weapon introduced, from what I've been able to mine out, was the Minotaur, a gun better left collecting rust than actually used in its current state. The council is trying, but there's not enough they can do without a significant, dedicated, specific plan for future updates in place. That's what is needed more than anything. Community updates need to come out at regular intervals, just as Muse updates need to come out just as regularly.

If you want to boost the numbers, that's the only way I can see. Neither of them seem to have that in place.

[Corporal Ravioli]

What we have in another hand, do greased hades and lumberjack still work? Anyone who can spam it from 500 meters to galleon/spire please raise hand.

"Well! Do things still work like they used to?"

Read the title.

[BlackenedPies]

But why only affect jitter-limited guns? And why such a high value of 90%? This makes guns which aren't significantly jitter limited but still have jitter, like mortar and Lflak, jitter limitted, while affecting jitter-limited guns like Gat and Banshee to an extreme degree

[Naoura]

Well, here's a counter to that; how would incresed drop really affect the Gatling, which has no drop, or the Banshee, which has the same issue.

Increased drop wouldn't really even phase these two.

Slower travel speed with the same projectile life doesn't really touch the gatling, or even the banshee. You can adjust as you fire due to the large clip, and have much more time to lead the shots a little bit better. Those suggestions kind of remove what the greased changes were supposed to do, vary what's used in the guns.

Jitter.... is kind of the only way to do that. I think it could have used a small boost either to ammo or to fire rate to make up for it, considering how wild the weapon is now, and at close range, where it's supposed to be used, ROF up would make it very strong and effective, meanwhile ammo up would compensate for lost shots at range.

[BlackenedPies]

Well, here's a counter to that; how would incresed drop really affect the Gatling, which has no drop, or the Banshee, which has the same issue.

Exactly... So why make a change that only affects half the guns? If jitter, drop, and speed were all changed then it would affect all guns. It's not elegant but is more balanced than an extreme jitter value

Another discussion I remember was reducing ROF or DMG. That kills its use in light carro and Lflak and doesn't effect Gat much due it its high clip and very slow empty time. Jitter is a great solution for Gat but I would've never guessed the end result of 90% and nothing else

[Naoura]

The change for only half the guns are the half of the guns that greased is used exclusively in. Sure, you can use Heatsink(old) and have a somewhat higher DPC, but you want DPS, not DPC. Sure, you could use Heavy, and scatter some component sniping in there, but you want DPS, not component sniping. You could use Incen (blegh), get some fires stacked on, but you're doing so little DPS.

That's why Greased. Just spam it into the enemy and they'll drop eventually. No point in using any other ammo.

Other weapons have other choices, where very few would be considered "unworthy". Charged can find a place on most weapons, even if underused. Loch easily finds a place on other weapons, though not on some. Lesmok, I need not talk about, it's a standard. Heatsink(old) can find a place anywhere. Incen is useable on a good majority of light weapons. Heavy can be used on some specifically, and situationally on others.

The overall idea as I can see it was to encourage utilizing other ammo types in weapons Greased was used specifically. Do I agree with it? Only slightly, as they didn't give anything to compensate with the drastically increased jitter. For what they wanted, an incredibly close range weapon designed for max dps, I would have given it higher ROF, to futher incentivize use at CQC.

Until Extended comes through, I can't really pass judgement on whether or not there's a replacement for what greased did.

[BlackenedPies]

I use Greased exclusively in Hades and Lumber. The only times I bring those guns are with greased because they're so freaking good. Buff engi with spanner mallet buff greased. I'm still as overpowered as ever

Why not set a minimum jitter value for greased: loading greased makes its value at least 3 for example (guns with higher jitter wouldn't be affected and they don't matter anyways). All guns are now jitter limited at further ranges and Gat has 30% increased jitter - a value that was originally generally agreed upon

[Naoura]

Here's the issue with that; Controlled fire. An LJ wouldn't really feel the jitter addition, because it's such a slow weapon and you can so easily adjust.

Hades would feel it for those rapid shots, and would be a balancing factor, I concur. But 30% was said to be 'unnoticable', hence the absurdly high amount.

If you're going to give it a base jitter, I'd go more for 5, honestly. That'd be felt very hard on Gat and Banshee, and potentially on other weapons as well. However, I would balance that with a little more on both clip and rate of fire to compensate. At CQC, greased would still be king. At mid range, Greased could be used, but would be difficult to use effectively.

[BlackenedPies]

Jitter can't be adjusted for because it's random and 5 deg jitter is equal to light carronade

Jitter radius = tan (jitter deg) * range

Lumber would be one of the most affected guns by base jitter due to its long effective range of around 500m against the ships its good against. At 500m with 3 deg the jitter radius is 26m, which means you can aim dead center on a Spire and might miss. At 5 deg it would be 44m - you could aim anywhere on a Galleon's broadside and miss

"Unnoticeable" is a terrible metric because it's difficult to estimate true accuracy. If you're aiming at the lower front of a Pyra at 300m with a Gat and compare 3 deg vs 2.25 deg jitter, you won't notice much difference but in reality the 29% higher jitter increases the jitter radius by 33%. Even a change of 1 in 10 shots that would've hit armor and now hitting components, balloon, or missing is critical. That's unnoticeable from your perspective but very significant

Maybe a base of 3 deg is too long-ranged for some tastes. At 4 deg you've increased the radius at 300m by 78%. At 5 deg it's +122%

[BlackenedPies]

For reference, thanks to Richard

See bottom right legend

[Naoura]

That was the original point, to reduce Greased's effectiveness at range, so it does make sense. But what we have now will have to be plaed through to see what the overall reaction is. See how the meta redevelopes around new greased, and see if it needs changing.

[BlackenedPies]

We know exactly how greased affects guns. I for one already made the swap to greased Hades on every build that doesn't require the horizontal arcs, and let me tell you that dealing the same DPS as regular Gat with better accuracy and fires and hull damage and a burst radius is pretty great! (and just as OP as ever )

Here's a rough representation of regular vs greased at 300m - which is 83% of its max range. The new range at which it's as effective as regular at 300m is now 150m



Ha! Good luck getting that close with your greased Gat against greased Hades

[BlackenedPies]

Reminder: Dev App tests are not accurate. "Getting a feel" can be useful for simple things like arc changes, but is otherwise useless unless you test accurately. Here's the bare minimum of an acceptable test of greased vs greased +30% jitter. Note: to be proper it requires A/B testing (double blind, recorded from all POVs, many rounds etc), and even then it's never better than running the numbers!

Have two identical ships at a set distance fire opposite greased at each other while aiming at the same point and swapping ammos each round. Screenshot armor and repeat until results are consistent. Retest at more ranges and with other ships

If this kind of test is too difficult or time consuming then don't test at all! Without testing you end up with biased results like "the 33% larger radius was unnoticeable". Inaccurate tests yield false results... and lead to +90% jitter

[Solidusbucket]

Have two identical ships at a set distance fire opposite greased at each other while aiming at the same point and swapping ammos each round. Screenshot armor and repeat until results are consistent. Retest at more ranges and with other ships

If this kind of test is too difficult or time consuming then don't test at all!

+1