Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 58 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
Member
User avatar
Team: Zephyr
Rank: Officer
Main: uss brown
Level: 4436

Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 8:12 pm
Posts: 116
Post Re: OFFICIAL: Tentative Tractor Beam Changes
Why not use the Inverse Square Law when calculating tractor strength? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse-square_law) Tl;dr, the farther something is past a range the weaker it becomes inversely square to its distance. IE something twice as far away has ¼ the intensity of the “initial” range.

This forces people to abandon reindeer harness tractors if they want to manipulate something past a certain range (could be arbitrary or could be a function of their base range). This would force people to use higher strength tractors (which usually equal higher tech) and to build around sustaining those tractors at whatever their preferred range would be. You would eliminate the use of “hitchhiker” tractors and force people to use actual pull tractors.

_________________
50% nerfs =/= ruined
It's not the new augs fault, must be the 10 year old ships fault!


Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:12 am
Profile
over 9000!
User avatar
Team: Traders
Rank: Director
Main: enkelin
Level: 5594

Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 12:28 pm
Posts: 11089
Post Re: OFFICIAL: Tentative Tractor Beam Changes
david95 wrote:
Why not use the Inverse Square Law when calculating tractor strength? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse-square_law) Tl;dr, the farther something is past a range the weaker it becomes inversely square to its distance. IE something twice as far away has ¼ the intensity of the “initial” range.

This forces people to abandon reindeer harness tractors if they want to manipulate something past a certain range (could be arbitrary or could be a function of their base range). This would force people to use higher strength tractors (which usually equal higher tech) and to build around sustaining those tractors at whatever their preferred range would be. You would eliminate the use of “hitchhiker” tractors and force people to use actual pull tractors.


We discussed a lot of different force laws but determined that it would be best not to change that aspect for now. As Hober said, we are doing our best to not affect the experience of using tractors at relatively short distances, such as holding a boss.

_________________
Hi, I'm Anil, a long-time player turned developer. I am Star Sonata's lead content developer, which means that I run weekly dev meetings and make sure that any proposed changes to the game receive proper review before going live.

http://www.starsonata.com/features


Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:15 am
Profile
Member
User avatar
Team: Zephyr
Rank: Officer
Main: uss brown
Level: 4436

Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 8:12 pm
Posts: 116
Post Re: OFFICIAL: Tentative Tractor Beam Changes
anilv wrote:

We discussed a lot of different force laws but determined that it would be best not to change that aspect for now. As Hober said, we are doing our best to not affect the experience of using tractors at relatively short distances, such as holding a boss.


i think that's where having an initial "grace" range where tractors don't weaken would help in conjunction with a different type of force law. It probably better than outright nerfing a lot of aug setups without initial extensive testing.

_________________
50% nerfs =/= ruined
It's not the new augs fault, must be the 10 year old ships fault!


Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:20 am
Profile
Press Corps
User avatar
Team: Aidelon
Rank: Officer
Main: DragonGod (Slaver)
Level: 2185

Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 10:12 pm
Posts: 742
Location: Houston, TX
Post Re: OFFICIAL: Tentative Tractor Beam Changes
ShawnMcCall wrote:
MasterTrader wrote:
The reason for this is that getting 5k+ Tractor Range on a 300 range tractor beam is completely unacceptable. The meta game should not revolve around creating ships that have invested heavily into end game gear and augmenters, only to use very low tech tractor beams to manipulate the battlefield.


And why the fuck shouldn't they? Because you just decided 5 minutes ago that you personally don't like it? Hate to run with the "let's hate Hober because he's bad" crowd, but this is exactly why they exist. There is no fucking reason to make this change, it is spurred literally only by your personal preference at this moment, and offers no positive gameplay features. Shit like this is exactly why I've left this game. There is no fucking direction, it's just a bunch of volunteer devs in a circle jerk with too much power because there isn't any fucking oversight so whatever halfbaked reason someone can come up with for huge changes is always enough.


Vitriol much.

As a member of the newly minted Pressed Cropse, I can say that this wasn't a unilateral decision on Hober's part as your post so heavily implies, and there wouldn't have been a post about it if other devs didn't agree with the proposal.


Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:28 am
Profile YIM
Contributor
User avatar
Team: Star Revolution X
Rank: Operator
Main: Hober Mallow
Level: 4019

Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 3:08 pm
Posts: 3148
Post Re: OFFICIAL: Tentative Tractor Beam Changes
The change we have proposed is actually the least invasive change, because no ones tractor ship setup needs to change in order to continue to be useful (You may need to change it around to be more efficient at using certain types of tractors though). There will be multiple tractor beams of varying strength levels, electricity costs and ranges and you will select the tractor beam that works best for you in the situation you're in. Changing the math behind it will completely change how beams feel (They're fun to use right now, we want to preserve that) and will require people to change their setups drastically in many cases (Changing setups because of system level changes like that is not fun, we want to avoid that).
Yoko_Kurama wrote:
Vitriol much.

As a member of the newly minted Pressed Cropse, I can say that this wasn't a unilateral decision on Hober's part as your post so heavily implies, and there wouldn't have been a post about it if other devs didn't agree with the proposal.

Man am I glad we have the Press Corps...

_________________
Image
Image
http://www.starsonata.com/suggestions


Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:30 am
Profile
Team: Eminence Front
Rank: Officer
Main: Zero Punctuation
Level: 2797

Joined: Mon May 06, 2013 1:00 pm
Posts: 23
Post Re: OFFICIAL: Tentative Tractor Beam Changes
Before you make the tractor change I want to strongly encourage having more avenues into getting tractoring 22 because there is a HUGE bottleneck when you need to get the holy ward, umbra, rhino roar the denial.. the entire skill line is very one directional with the only meaningful other option is yin and yang which are roaming Uber's that have a low spawn rate and are rarely seen ----- I think this change on top of the changes I said in my earlier post could make this a very nice alteration to the game.


Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:59 am
Profile
Team: Deep Space Federation
Rank: Officer
Main: Rendghast
Level: 1467

Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 12:47 am
Posts: 489
Post Re: OFFICIAL: Tentative Tractor Beam Changes
Scuse me, Scuse me, Pardon, Coming through.

ShawnMcCall wrote:
MasterTrader wrote:
The reason for this is that getting 5k+ Tractor Range on a 300 range tractor beam is completely unacceptable. The meta game should not revolve around creating ships that have invested heavily into end game gear and augmenters, only to use very low tech tractor beams to manipulate the battlefield.


And why the fuck shouldn't they? Because you just decided 5 minutes ago that you personally don't like it?


Because the most basic principle in game design is that higher levels should be more powerful then lower levels. You seriously clam to be an experienced MMO player and you do not get that part?. If people with tech 8 equipment are conssitantly rolling people with tech 22 equipment, that is a MAJOR design problem with the game. I have more of an issue with the fact that it has taken them this long to notice it, and they STILL have not correctly identified the problem.

HOPER THE REASON PEOPLE ARE USING LOWER TECH TRACTORS IS THAT TRACTORING 15+ IS MONSTEROUS TO GET, EVEN FOR PAY TO PLAYS!!!!


ShawnMcCall wrote:
Hate to run with the "let's hate Hober because he's bad" crowd, but this is exactly why they exist.


Have you tried not running with them then?

ShawnMcCall wrote:
There is no fucking reason to make this change, it is spurred literally only by your personal preference at this moment, and offers no positive gameplay features.


Lemme repeat back to you what i just read. "I am uber elite game player, i am watching Ragnaroks armed with Blue bullets Beta wipe the floor with Heph Machines, but i am totally fine with that becouse URrble Wurble Derble Burble."

Shawn, i swear to god every time you open your mouth i loose respect for you more. I did not have that much to begin with, so we have to be in negative numbers by now. PLayer with tech 6-10 equipment are clobbering players with tech 21 equipment, and you are not seeing the problem there? REALLY?


ShawnMcCall wrote:
Shit like this is exactly why I've left this game.


"The screaming glaring meta imbalances are being corrected! I actually have to fight based on my personal acumen and skill! I quit!"

ShawnMcCall wrote:
There is no fucking direction, it's just a bunch of volunteer devs in a circle jerk with too much power because there isn't any fucking oversight so whatever halfbaked reason someone can come up with for huge changes is always enough.


There are a number of changes that have been made that is vehemently disagree with, and a number i have proposed that have been shot down. But I understand where the dev team thinks it is going. Its not going to go there, because they are not understanding player demographics, but they are trying to head in a certain direction. This is the first major change in a while i actually mostly agree with, AND is headed in the actual right direction, provided they actually take into consideration my twos suggestions.

1) make tractoring easier to get

2) treat trac str and trac range the same way you treat damage and rof on augmenters.

_________________
Image
Image
Image


Wed Aug 09, 2017 12:55 pm
Profile
User avatar
Team: Star Revolution X
Rank: Councilor
Main: DreadLordNaf
Level: 5337

Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 10:33 am
Posts: 669
Post Re: OFFICIAL: Tentative Tractor Beam Changes
lrellok wrote:
PLayer with tech 6-10 equipment are clobbering players with tech 21 equipment, and you are not seeing the problem there?


With respect to this idea which is driving a lot of the momentum here, I still stand by my initial response: this is an engi-centric only "problem." If folks or devs feel otherwise, can you just please help enlighten us ignorant folk by posting an example ship/aug/tractor setup for a NON-ENGIS that you feel is way too OP for its level in terms of its tractoring ability and ability to sustain energy? Cause I am not seeing it. The high end non-Engi tractoship setups cost a lot to build...

BTW im not calling for an engi nerf, I always assumed op tractoring was just the inherent trait of engis given they have a whole skill for it. But if this "imbalance" really is just with engi tractorships, then it prob shouldnt be framed like its a problem game-wide and/or the fix should just be specific to those instances.

Also everything here seems pvp focused. While PVE tractoring actually needs serious revamp. Right now PVE tractoring simply means using an engi. Because there are few to zero reasonable augs that allow a class to gain a modest amount of tractor to improve basic PVE tractoring without totally screwing up their main ship role. Right now as an FC if i want to improve my main combat ship tractoring i have one single aug option (saluna psu) that is actually an engi focused aug. There was, but is not anymore, any sort of hybrid augs that are FC focused, but trade off a little bit of FC stats for some tractoring. Its either all or nothing right now. Same with most classes except engis.


Wed Aug 09, 2017 1:21 pm
Profile
over 9000!
User avatar
Team: Traders
Rank: Director
Main: enkelin
Level: 5594

Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 12:28 pm
Posts: 11089
Post Re: OFFICIAL: Tentative Tractor Beam Changes
Dread, you make a good point about the strength of Engineer class here. One thing Hober mentioned about making PvE tractoring less class-dependent is that we could buff the strength of tractors across the board (once they no longer operate at longer-than-intended range). This would make it a lot easier for non-Engineers to hold stuff at close range. If needed, we could also take some of Engineer's tractor strength bonus and apply it directly to the stats of tractor beams (essentially making that bonus apply for everyone).

I would like to take a look at your FC's tractor ship. This is actually the first I'm hearing about a non-Engineer tractor ship that has any kind of decent stats.

_________________
Hi, I'm Anil, a long-time player turned developer. I am Star Sonata's lead content developer, which means that I run weekly dev meetings and make sure that any proposed changes to the game receive proper review before going live.

http://www.starsonata.com/features


Wed Aug 09, 2017 1:34 pm
Profile
Team: Deep Space Federation
Rank: Officer
Main: Rendghast
Level: 1467

Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 12:47 am
Posts: 489
Post Re: OFFICIAL: Tentative Tractor Beam Changes
dreadlordnaf wrote:
lrellok wrote:
If folks or devs feel otherwise, can you just please help enlighten us ignorant folk by posting an example ship/aug/tractor setup for a NON-ENGIS that you feel is way too OP for its level in terms of its tractoring ability and ability to sustain energy? Cause I am not seeing it.


Any zerker with a Profane Thirst, Vile Longing, or Blasphemous Fervor would close range at jaw dropping speeds. Which is why i keep advocating that range and str be separated, because the next thing i am going to advocate is that tractor range be added to various DPS or Energy augs.

_________________
Image
Image
Image


Wed Aug 09, 2017 1:50 pm
Profile
User avatar
Team: Star Revolution X
Rank: Councilor
Main: DreadLordNaf
Level: 5337

Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 10:33 am
Posts: 669
Post Re: OFFICIAL: Tentative Tractor Beam Changes
anilv wrote:
Dread, you make a good point about the strength of Engineer class here. One thing Hober mentioned about making PvE tractoring less class-dependent is that we could buff the strength of tractors across the board (once they no longer operate at longer-than-intended range). This would make it a lot easier for non-Engineers to hold stuff at close range. If needed, we could also take some of Engineer's tractor strength bonus and apply it directly to the stats of tractor beams (essentially making that bonus apply for everyone).

I would like to take a look at your FC's tractor ship. This is actually the first I'm hearing about a non-Engineer tractor ship that has any kind of decent stats.


I see what you are saying now with regards to buffing tractors base str, but reducing aug bonuses etc. But the effect on non-engi tractorships should still be factored into this though, if anything to ensure their stats remain relatively the same since folks dont seem to be complaining about them, and this doesnt seem to be what is causing imbalance issues.. I will post ship stats when back home.

lrellok wrote:
Any zerker with a Profane Thirst, Vile Longing, or Blasphemous Fervor would close range at jaw dropping speeds. Which is why i keep advocating that range and str be separated, because the next thing i am going to advocate is that tractor range be added to various DPS or Energy augs.


While that may be true, this wasnt one of the stated reasons by the devs for such a grand change, nor does anyone think this is an OP ability. This is a minor ability that is super easy to counter with a push tractor.


Wed Aug 09, 2017 2:01 pm
Profile
Contributor
User avatar
Team: Star Revolution X
Rank: Operator
Main: Hober Mallow
Level: 4019

Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 3:08 pm
Posts: 3148
Post Re: OFFICIAL: Tentative Tractor Beam Changes
dreadlordnaf wrote:
anilv wrote:
Dread, you make a good point about the strength of Engineer class here. One thing Hober mentioned about making PvE tractoring less class-dependent is that we could buff the strength of tractors across the board (once they no longer operate at longer-than-intended range). This would make it a lot easier for non-Engineers to hold stuff at close range. If needed, we could also take some of Engineer's tractor strength bonus and apply it directly to the stats of tractor beams (essentially making that bonus apply for everyone).

I would like to take a look at your FC's tractor ship. This is actually the first I'm hearing about a non-Engineer tractor ship that has any kind of decent stats.


I see what you are saying now with regards to buffing tractors base str, but reducing aug bonuses etc. But the effect on non-engi tractorships should still be factored into this though, if anything to ensure their stats remain relatively the same since folks dont seem to be complaining about them, and this doesnt seem to be what is causing imbalance issues.. I will post ship stats when back home.

lrellok wrote:
Any zerker with a Profane Thirst, Vile Longing, or Blasphemous Fervor would close range at jaw dropping speeds. Which is why i keep advocating that range and str be separated, because the next thing i am going to advocate is that tractor range be added to various DPS or Energy augs.


While that may be true, this wasnt one of the stated reasons by the devs for such a grand change, nor does anyone think this is an OP ability. This is a minor ability that is super easy to counter with a push tractor.


I wouldn't be adjusting tractors around Engineers, I would be adjusting them to be worthwhile on any class by themselves. Engineers would end up having stronger tractor beams that can be powered longer, I don't care if Tractor Ship Engineer's tractor beams became so strong you couldn't escape from them without Graviton Disruptors. As long as you're not doing it from 9k range with cheap tractors and cheap electricity costs. This also, incidentally, ties in nicely with the buff we plan on doing to base engine strengths.

_________________
Image
Image
http://www.starsonata.com/suggestions


Wed Aug 09, 2017 2:25 pm
Profile
User avatar
Team: Zephyr
Rank: Officer
Main: Taylor Swift
Level: 1665

Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 3:11 pm
Posts: 3887
Location: ur mums a ram
Post Re: OFFICIAL: Tentative Tractor Beam Changes
Quote:
The meta game should not revolve around creating ships that have invested heavily into end game gear and augmenters, only to use very low tech tractor beams to manipulate the battlefield.


ok


what about lower tech shields?
Image

lower tech super items?
Image

I just want to say that a higher tech item doesn't always have to be an upgrade. it can be a side-grade. and I don't think that having some lower tech items also be useful to endgame players is bad at all.

I don't like the mentality that a higher tech item has to always be 100% better because then you know that literally every single piece of loot you get that isn't t22 is complete shit, and then no one bothers doing t21 and under bosses any more than they have to for skills

_________________
Image
ImageImage

Image

I would like to think the line "excuse me but can I get a shitpost?" is fairly polite.


Wed Aug 09, 2017 4:24 pm
Profile
User avatar
Team: Star Revolution X
Rank: Councilor
Main: DreadLordNaf
Level: 5337

Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 10:33 am
Posts: 669
Post Re: OFFICIAL: Tentative Tractor Beam Changes
My current non-Engi tractorship, which is my main tractorship. Some gear such as energy currently changed out. I will say prior to this uni, the majority of our team tractorships were non-engi ones, so please take these into consideration. I dont have a parasite cleaner cause I wanted to keep all the nila raktas and was experimenting with their weight bonus + carrying ICs to anchor myself better.


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.


Wed Aug 09, 2017 6:10 pm
Profile
User avatar
Team: Star Revolution X
Rank: Operator
Main: Septagons Titan
Level: 2312

Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 3:37 pm
Posts: 653
Location: Floof
Post Re: OFFICIAL: Tentative Tractor Beam Changes
Are you planning to ease the difficulty/cost of leveling up Tractoring? Because as it currently is, it's absurd. Getting from T14 to T16 costs like 20b unless you spend an entire uni prospecting for the rarest commod out there or get obscenely lucky with a drop. I don't even want to know what T17-T20 costs.

Also, something Daedalus said about how there isn't a 'set' way to play the game, but it's moving in that direction really hit me. I remember a long time ago Jv2 mentioned how he made some sort of crazy MF FC ship for himself, because he wanted to fight with his slaves. It was a really cool idea, and from what he described he got shit on by the stereotypical wise ones because it wasn't really optimal or the best thing out there. I want to see more unique, surprising builds out there instead of this trend toward there being one or two paths of mediocrity for each class. Battle Spheres were a cool, unique thing (if overpowered a bit, though they were glass cannons apparently even when they had 5 aug slots) and now have basically been killed.

I'm kinda scared that similar things like that will happen to me one day, I'll wake up in the morning and a ship I spend half a year working on because I loved its appearance was turned into trash because it was deemed OP or not something players of a certains style should be using. If something like that happened, and that much time/investment was wiped out I would probably just drift away from the game.

Anyway, this is getting a bit off topic, but thought I'd say that since it made me think of that.


Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:13 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 58 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.