Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Settings changes
#1
1. Can we not make every green equal one of three things: brick, thor, rocket?

 

2. Shark sucks.  Make the antiwarp cost normal instead of 150.

 

3. How about rewarding people for good aim and making direct bombs 850 for everything but weasle.  Heck i'd say make it 900.

Reply
#2
Quote:<div>
 

3. How about rewarding people for good aim and making direct bombs 850 for everything but weasle.  Heck i'd say make it 900.

</div>
 

Also lets make bullets 1 shot kill. javelins should only fire multi backwards, limit resolution and lets defend a base with 1 flag instead of 4v4.
Reply
#3
lol

WTF Get off my lawn!
Reply
#4
Quote:<div>
 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Micloren" data-cid="291971" data-time="1409900576">
<div>
 

3. How about rewarding people for good aim and making direct bombs 850 for everything but weasle.  Heck i'd say make it 900.

</div>
 

Also lets make bullets 1 shot kill. javelins should only fire multi backwards, limit resolution and lets defend a base with 1 flag instead of 4v4.

 

</div>
</blockquote>
 

I was hoping for serious responses.  

 

Why should the weasel be the only ship rewarded for perfect aim with 1200+ dmg?  Why is it that the total shrap damage that can be done by one bomb is 1520 yet a direct hit is only 800?  You're better off not to landing a direct and getting someone to hit a few shrap than you are having precision aim.

 

We've all seen people complain about crazy deaths because somehow they were hit by a bomb at 1300 energy and smacked by 4 shrapnel.  Why should random shrapnel almost do the same damage (190) that an aimed bullet (212) does?

 

So the way i see it:

 

1. Increase direct bomb damage.  However, i assume this can't be done for specific ships?

2. Lower shrap damage.

3. Lower maximum shrap to 4.

Reply
#5
Quote:<div>
random shrapnel 

</div>
*drooool*
Reply
#6
sorry - I drafted up a longer response and lost it because tab->backspace. 

 

I'm going to use your comments about shrapnel and twist them into something bigger - about balancing gameplay - because I have an axe to grind. 

 

Shrap isn't random - it does fixed damage and flies at a fixed angle. The pseudo-random elements that might lead to the scenario you're talking about are 1) repels and 2) shrap bouncing off tiles because the bomb exploded at a fortuitous point on the map. Should we remove repels and tiles, then? 

 

Your general argument looks like one that's been made many times before: remove randomness to reward skilled play. That's a gameplay balance question - do you reward skill exclusively, or do you preserve some element of randomness in order to keep less-dedicated players rewarded and invested? How long do you think a skill-based game like poker would last if you took all the randomness out of it, and the superior players won every time?  

 

4v4 has always been the top-of-the-heap skill arena, and people have used that status to argue in favor of taking all the random out. That might have been fine when there were other SVS or pseudo-SVS arenas to serve as incubators for those who are dedicated - but 4v4 is more or less all that's left.

 

Look at all the ways the deck is already stacked in favor of the hard-core players:

  1. the arena format itself is stacked in favor of skill - winning cap stays in, winning cap can decide who to play with (.ban), and who to play against (.forcecap). losing players sit.
  2. the 4v4 format is stacked in favor of skill - the 3 life limit means inferior players get targeted, straight up.
  3. the gameplay is stacked in favor of skill - most random elements are long gone from the game (bullets, shrap), and others are nerfed (green rewards are random, but don't have much impact on play)
I'm not saying these are bad things. Hell, I think most would argue that the reason 4v4 has lasted this long is that it is a skill game. But we all know we aren't getting new players to replace the ones who drift away, and that's mostly because what you're arguing for comes at a cost, and the cost is borne by those players who don't have 50 hours a week to get good. 

 

ETA: As others have pointed out, the prac arenas are dominated (especially on weeknights) by the same 10-15 people, day in, day out. That's great for them - they get to play - but is it good for the game itself, or anybody who doesn't have either 50 hours a week or a pre-existing group of pilots to play with? 

Reply
#7
Says the guy on his 2nd post.

Reply
#8
Quote:<div>
Says the guy on his 2nd post.

</div>
 

IF YOU HAVE LESS THAN 660 POSTS, YOU'RE OBVIOUSLY STUPID AND NO ONE SHOULD LISTEN TO YOU. 

 

ALSO, IF YOU CAN'T WIN 4V4 PRACTICES AGAINST 4 GUYS WHO PRACTICE 50 HOURS A WEEK, YOU'RE STUPID, AND NO ONE SHOULD LISTEN TO YOU.
Reply
#9
Quote:<div>
Says the guy on his 2nd post.

</div>
Says the guy who is a pub scrub who can't even have a + rating nor anything close to a 1-1 k/d ratio

http://www.svssubspace.com/?page=Pilot&id=Bargeld
Reply
#10
Quote:<div>
 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Bargeld" data-cid="291980" data-time="1409955453">
<div>
Says the guy on his 2nd post.

</div>
Says the guy who is a pub scrub who can't even have a + rating nor anything close to a 1-1 k/d ratio

http://www.svssubspace.com/?page=Pilot&id=Bargeld

 

</div>
</blockquote>
Says the guy with 2 games under his belt for current reset. -24 and +1, well done.

http://svssubspace.com/?page=Pilot&year=2008&month=0&&id=7th
Reply
#11
7th, you haven't even played in 10 consecutive finals, take a seat.

Reply
#12
Takes effort to dodge shrap so I strongly disagree with changing it. Everyone has time to see that a bomb is going to impact and they should have a sense of where it'll explode, so it's possible to control your ship to avoid hitting the shrap that comes out in the 8 directions. Maybe not every time, but it's something that would be considered skillful to do (lets not reduce the skill ceiling in this game, or lower the skill floor). I don't want to simplify the game by making shrap something people are ok with flying into, I like that they do a significant amount of damage.


With respect to comparing emps and bombs, I'm curious to know what the exact numbers are for a direct's emp time and by extension the amount of energy you don't get recharged cause of that. Too lazy to figure it out but I would wait before saying anything more. And about the direct doing less than an indirect with shrap, that's very circumstantial (are they in a small space vs out in the open?).

Reply
#13
Other points: yes shark does suck, but it will still suck even if u change the aw cost. Not entirely clear what you suggested with greens... you *want* every one to be one of those 3 right? Well i'm not sure if it's possible but that's sounds like something worth trying.

Reply
#14
Quote:<div>
7th, you haven't even played in 10 consecutive finals, take a seat.

</div>
Sorry, I couldn't do 10 in a row.  It is like 10 in the last 11 seasons.. Sad I'll do better next time.

 

 

Quote:<div>
 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="7th Saga" data-cid="291982" data-time="1409959686">
<div>
 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Bargeld" data-cid="291980" data-time="1409955453">
<div>
Says the guy on his 2nd post.

</div>
Says the guy who is a pub scrub who can't even have a + rating nor anything close to a 1-1 k/d ratio

http://www.svssubspace.com/?page=Pilot&id=Bargeld

 

</div>
</blockquote>
Says the guy with 2 games under his belt for current reset. -24 and +1, well done.

http://svssubspace.com/?page=Pilot&year=2008&month=0&&id=7th

 

</div>
</blockquote>
You are looking at erat? the most flawed stat in the game?   and the reset was not even 6 days ago..   
Reply
#15
Quote:<div>
Takes effort to dodge shrap so I strongly disagree with changing it. Everyone has time to see that a bomb is going to impact and they should have a sense of where it'll explode, so it's possible to control your ship to avoid hitting the shrap that comes out in the 8 directions. Maybe not every time, but it's something that would be considered skillful to do (lets not reduce the skill ceiling in this game, or lower the skill floor). I don't want to simplify the game by making shrap something people are ok with flying into, I like that they do a significant amount of damage.


With respect to comparing emps and bombs, I'm curious to know what the exact numbers are for a direct's emp time and by extension the amount of energy you don't get recharged cause of that. Too lazy to figure it out but I would wait before saying anything more. And about the direct doing less than an indirect with shrap, that's very circumstantial (are they in a small space vs out in the open?).

</div>
All the ships setting stuff and bomb dmg and emp dmg + time recharge etc..  is here

http://www.subspace.co/topic/26024-4v4-ship-settings/
Reply
#16
Quote:<div>
Takes effort to dodge shrap so I strongly disagree with changing it. Everyone has time to see that a bomb is going to impact and they should have a sense of where it'll explode, so it's possible to control your ship to avoid hitting the shrap that comes out in the 8 directions. Maybe not every time, but it's something that would be considered skillful to do (lets not reduce the skill ceiling in this game, or lower the skill floor). I don't want to simplify the game by making shrap something people are ok with flying into, I like that they do a significant amount of damage.


With respect to comparing emps and bombs, I'm curious to know what the exact numbers are for a direct's emp time and by extension the amount of energy you don't get recharged cause of that. Too lazy to figure it out but I would wait before saying anything more. And about the direct doing less than an indirect with shrap, that's very circumstantial (are they in a small space vs out in the open?).

</div>
 

Direct EMP does about 1200 total dmg because of the 4 second recharge delay.
Reply
#17
Quote:<div>
Other points: yes shark does suck, but it will still suck even if u change the aw cost. Not entirely clear what you suggested with greens... you *want* every one to be one of those 3 right? Well i'm not sure if it's possible but that's sounds like something worth trying.

</div>
 

Shark only sucks MAJORLY because of the anti warp cost.  You can't purposely fly it and run anti.  Even worse is if you are down to 1v1 and having to run anti.

 

Yes on the greens.
Reply
#18
I still disagree with everyone on the shrapnel.  Why should i be rewarded for missing someone rather than a perfectly placed bomb?

 

You aim a bomb, you aim bullets, you don't aim shrapnel it's fixed.  Personally i think its damage should be either A) reduced to 100, or B) have the number of shrap reduced to 4/5.

Reply
#19
Quote:<div>
 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Street" data-cid="291985" data-time="1410002371">
<div>
7th, you haven't even played in 10 consecutive finals, take a seat.

</div>
Sorry, I couldn't do 10 in a row.  It is like 10 in the last 11 seasons.. Sad I'll do better next time.

</div>
</blockquote>
 

Damn right you will.
Reply
#20
Quote:<div>
I still disagree with everyone on the shrapnel.  Why should i be rewarded for missing someone rather than a perfectly placed bomb?

 

You aim a bomb, you aim bullets, you don't aim shrapnel it's fixed.  Personally i think its damage should be either A) reduced to 100, or B) have the number of shrap reduced to 4/5.

</div>
Obviously, you aren't missing someone because the bomb explodes.  If you ever watch pros skim bombs so they do very little damage and the shrap doesnt hit them because it is predictable. The only situation where shrap become unpredictable is when you are in a tight space or are rep killed.  These two areas add a bit more inconsistancy which, I believe, gives the game more character. Shrap add another level of difficulty for dodging.  Just get better at predicting shrap (they are pretty obvious) and then dodge. 
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)