16
Release Notes / Re: 1.4.5 New Balance Changes "When Ambush Comes To Shove"
« on: March 18, 2016, 06:10:40 pm »
Haahahahahaha.
Oh. Wait. You're serious.
Oh. Wait. You're serious.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
17
General Discussion / Re: How would YOU nerf the Mobula?
« on: March 17, 2016, 02:09:32 pm »
Five light guns in the same direction is the defining characteristic of the Mobula.
The vertical mobility is a stupid, nonsensical oversight.
The vertical mobility is a stupid, nonsensical oversight.
18
General Discussion / Re: How would YOU nerf the Mobula?
« on: March 16, 2016, 11:45:24 am »
Mobula is OP, considering it does everything that the Junker does better.
When one ship is *the* best long-range ship in the game, without question, and better than all but 2 close-range, maybe you should give balance a look?
To the post above, Mobula wasn't OP when Pyra was dominant, because Pyramideon sniping was viable, and because neither Carronade nor Flamer hadn't been nerfed. It was still a very powerful ship that got taken to Hephaestus finals--definitely high-tier, but it had competition. Now, it's a safe choice for basically any team comp. There is no place where you go "no, taking a mob is a bad idea."
The Pyra's nerf made "head on killship" style play pretty damn hard. The Mobula laughs at Hwatchafish, but it much weaker to gat-mortar, and the Pyra back then could keep it in arcs effectively. It can't do that anymore.
Can you say that about any other ship in the game?
Other ships need buffs. Heavy Weapons need buffs. The game's balance is fucked, yo. But you can only evaluate a ship's power in the context of the meta, and in this meta, the Mob is definitely OP.
When one ship is *the* best long-range ship in the game, without question, and better than all but 2 close-range, maybe you should give balance a look?
To the post above, Mobula wasn't OP when Pyra was dominant, because Pyramideon sniping was viable, and because neither Carronade nor Flamer hadn't been nerfed. It was still a very powerful ship that got taken to Hephaestus finals--definitely high-tier, but it had competition. Now, it's a safe choice for basically any team comp. There is no place where you go "no, taking a mob is a bad idea."
The Pyra's nerf made "head on killship" style play pretty damn hard. The Mobula laughs at Hwatchafish, but it much weaker to gat-mortar, and the Pyra back then could keep it in arcs effectively. It can't do that anymore.
Can you say that about any other ship in the game?
Other ships need buffs. Heavy Weapons need buffs. The game's balance is fucked, yo. But you can only evaluate a ship's power in the context of the meta, and in this meta, the Mob is definitely OP.
19
General Discussion / Re: How would YOU nerf the Mobula?
« on: March 15, 2016, 11:23:27 pm »
I actually had "removing the top two guns" as one of my list of ideas to re-build the meta. (Along with adding another light gun to the Galleon, and fixing the Spire.)
The Mobula's guns slots give it Junker versatility, without the need to turn, and with Squid verticality.
The Mobula's guns slots give it Junker versatility, without the need to turn, and with Squid verticality.
20
General Discussion / Re: How would YOU nerf the Mobula?
« on: March 15, 2016, 05:27:35 pm »
The verticals are stupid, coupled with how the balloon works. People say the pyra nerf helped the mob turn into a cancer ship, and forget the fact that carronade and flamer were nerfed in the same patch cycle.
Artimii also need a look at. They're incredibly easy to disable with, and function well at any range. I'd like their hull damage to be taken down.
Artimii also need a look at. They're incredibly easy to disable with, and function well at any range. I'd like their hull damage to be taken down.
21
Dev App Testing / Re: "When Ambush Comes to Shove" -Week 3 Possibly final testing?!
« on: March 12, 2016, 10:52:16 pm »
As a note, increasing the Pyra's hull does not help it ram. I ram often in a squid. Rams are not about damage. Rams are about controlling the enemy ship. If the hull is buffed, and the turning and acceleration remains slow, ramming is still bad.
22
Dev App Testing / Re: "When Ambush Comes to Shove" -Week 3 Possibly final testing?!
« on: March 12, 2016, 01:59:57 pm »
Still don't think the Pyra should be a ramming ship. Hull buff is nice. Mobula nerf is acceptable, but I'd prefer a verticality nerf.
Flak change is acceptable.
The fact that you're proceeding ahead with all the other changes, Muse, is proof that you have literally no idea how to balance the game. You have done a beautiful job with art, molding, and coding, and design, but when it comes to balance, and working with the a community, this is your first big game. You've been at it a while, and it has evolved, but it feels like you're stuck right now. This isn't me being insulting--this is me stating the obvious. Have another round-table discussion. Figure out what you want out of combat in the game. Ask the players what they like, and don't like. Set up a poll. Co-Op will act as a band-aid, because it allows you to shift the focus from ship v ship combat to objective based gameplay, but right now, you need a consistent objective and direction for PvP combat. You plainly do not have that.
I really want a mission statement for what you want to see out of combat in this game--what is your direction for balance? Where do you see tactical depths coming from in combat? Where do you see counterplay emerging? What are the strengths of sniping, and brawling, and how should they be represented in guns and ships? What are each ship's strengths, and what are their weaknesses? What separates a novice of each class from a veteran, and what separates a PuB from a team? What role does ammo serve? Does stamina serve? How will each of those be used by a novice, or a veteran?
You need to have solid, consistent answers for all of these for the game to have *depth*. Right now, most of the depth is in the teamwork, which is awesome, and very little is in the gameplay. This is a turn-off for many people--probably the biggest turn-off after the simple "knowledge cap" to play, because of poorly explained mechanics.
I do not believe you have answers to these questions--if you do, I would be happy to hear them. I desperately want this game to be played--to last. I do not have your in-office perspective, but I have the perspective of a long-time gamer. It does not appear as though you have a coherent balance direction. Please explain to us where you want this game to be. Kevias, I'll probably email, but I'll take a PM. I am deeply concerned about the apparent lack of direction, and would like to understand, and help, if I can.
Flak change is acceptable.
The fact that you're proceeding ahead with all the other changes, Muse, is proof that you have literally no idea how to balance the game. You have done a beautiful job with art, molding, and coding, and design, but when it comes to balance, and working with the a community, this is your first big game. You've been at it a while, and it has evolved, but it feels like you're stuck right now. This isn't me being insulting--this is me stating the obvious. Have another round-table discussion. Figure out what you want out of combat in the game. Ask the players what they like, and don't like. Set up a poll. Co-Op will act as a band-aid, because it allows you to shift the focus from ship v ship combat to objective based gameplay, but right now, you need a consistent objective and direction for PvP combat. You plainly do not have that.
I really want a mission statement for what you want to see out of combat in this game--what is your direction for balance? Where do you see tactical depths coming from in combat? Where do you see counterplay emerging? What are the strengths of sniping, and brawling, and how should they be represented in guns and ships? What are each ship's strengths, and what are their weaknesses? What separates a novice of each class from a veteran, and what separates a PuB from a team? What role does ammo serve? Does stamina serve? How will each of those be used by a novice, or a veteran?
You need to have solid, consistent answers for all of these for the game to have *depth*. Right now, most of the depth is in the teamwork, which is awesome, and very little is in the gameplay. This is a turn-off for many people--probably the biggest turn-off after the simple "knowledge cap" to play, because of poorly explained mechanics.
I do not believe you have answers to these questions--if you do, I would be happy to hear them. I desperately want this game to be played--to last. I do not have your in-office perspective, but I have the perspective of a long-time gamer. It does not appear as though you have a coherent balance direction. Please explain to us where you want this game to be. Kevias, I'll probably email, but I'll take a PM. I am deeply concerned about the apparent lack of direction, and would like to understand, and help, if I can.
23
Dev App Testing / Re: "When Ambush Comes to Shove" -Week 3 Possibly final testing?!
« on: March 11, 2016, 11:40:48 pm »
Yeah. Ammo types need an overhaul.
24
Dev App Testing / Re: "When Ambush Comes to Shove" -Week 3 Possibly final testing?!
« on: March 11, 2016, 02:42:35 pm »
I'll come and give feedback when after I've seen the notes, and played but overall...eh. Guns needs a larger balance tweak than muse is willing to give. The overall death spiral gameplay is flawed.
The "balance" changes that have happened so far are inane, with a few small exceptions. This game does need *dramatic* balance changes, and I think with Alliance, Muse is beginning to realize it. The fix isn't just changing numbers, though that's a part. I've started to come to the conclusion lately that the overall gameplay is deeply, dramatically flawed. There needs to be more depth that isn't simply based on player knowledge. New players aren't intimidated by crunchy numbers. Lots of games require learning stuff, and have crunchy numbers, if you dig deep enough. What's needed is clear paths toward player improvement, and greater mechanical depth.
The "balance" changes that have happened so far are inane, with a few small exceptions. This game does need *dramatic* balance changes, and I think with Alliance, Muse is beginning to realize it. The fix isn't just changing numbers, though that's a part. I've started to come to the conclusion lately that the overall gameplay is deeply, dramatically flawed. There needs to be more depth that isn't simply based on player knowledge. New players aren't intimidated by crunchy numbers. Lots of games require learning stuff, and have crunchy numbers, if you dig deep enough. What's needed is clear paths toward player improvement, and greater mechanical depth.
25
Dev App Testing / Re: Sunday testing release notes.
« on: March 08, 2016, 06:07:01 pm »
Spire does not work in long-range combat. Its components are too exposed, it's impossible not to hit hull if you are firing in it's vague direction, and it's low armor/decent health combo means you instantly have one person tied in up repairs.
26
Dev App Testing / Re: Sunday testing release notes.
« on: March 08, 2016, 05:24:56 pm »
The game is very poorly balanced when it comes to long-range combat currently anyway.
27
Dev App Testing / Re: "When Ambush Comes to Shove" - Week 2 is being tested this weekend! (change log)
« on: March 06, 2016, 03:00:54 pm »
The Mobula's multi-range dominance is not good for the Junker. For that alone, I'm not upset by the arc nerf.
28
Dev App Testing / Re: "When Ambush Comes to Shove" - Week 2 is being tested this weekend! (change log)
« on: March 05, 2016, 09:04:48 pm »
Nerf the ship that sees 0 legit competitive play.
Still a great idea.
Still a great idea.
29
Dev App Testing / Re: Sunday testing release notes.
« on: February 27, 2016, 06:56:38 pm »
I am against the Squid buff. It is utterly unnecessary.
30
Dev App Testing / Re: Sunday testing release notes.
« on: February 27, 2016, 05:13:43 pm »I might be one of the few people who scatter shots with burst rounds when close enough to disable then follow-up-kill when hull goes down, or into another disable, a reduced clip would easily nerf that strength as well...
Most people with any experience do not use the whole clip in one volley. This is why it's a very low-skill weapon to use effectively. The only difference is between a novice, and a vet, rather than between a vet, and a vet with more skill/experience. This adds a skill aspect to the Hwatcha, and makes it harder to use effectively. A newbie *can* use it well, but using it to full potential will require prediction, accuracy, and reflex, and timing now.