| Author |
Beyond Numbers: |
Achilles Lord of the Myrmidon
Grand Admiral
The Myrmidon Legion
Joined: December 15, 2009
Posts: 327
|  Posted: 2013-01-06 14:09
Ok I often do not complain because, I do love this game, so when I do its usully about something big. I have stayed true to Dark Space since its launch in 2001 and have watched this game change in many way. In most cases the changes did not sway my opinon one way or the other. However, I do feel of few things need to be said regarding Balance of this game. I am not talking about ICC shields gettign a buff or K'Luth Chitnous armour getting a buff. Those changes were needed. Prior to those patches ICC did need a defense buff and Kluths Chitnous armour did need to be heavier. However, the nerf to UGTO in my OPINON did not need to happen. Heres Why:
While at the present UGTO maintians the most active player base our numbers alone do not out weigh a combined force of both ICC and K'Luth players. Which means Even if UGTO had the most players online we still would be outnumbered. I understand it is not the fault of the DEV's that Players on diffrent factions team up agianst another faction thats not their problem ,but when the faction that is supposed to be the "heavy tank" faction cant even stay in a firefight long enough to protect its own ground something must be wrong. I am simply asking the DEV's to see this beyond the pure numbers, I understand the numbers show everything in balance, but this is problem exist beyond that as well.
_________________
There Are no Pacts Between Lions and men.
Signature size too large, please resize (600x200x100kb)
|
Rykros1987
Fleet Admiral
Joined: October 01, 2012
Posts: 88
From: Not in an asylum. Yet.
| Posted: 2013-01-06 14:23
I don't see how we are the tank faction. O.o I thought ICC were the evasive tanks...kluth the silent assassins...and ugto the target practice boards. D:
Oh and please remove the second topic you made as its a double posting. D:
[ This Message was edited by: rykros1987 on 2013-01-06 14:25 ]
_________________
|
-DBS
Marshal
Joined: January 04, 2011
Posts: 204
From: St. Petersburg, FL
| Posted: 2013-01-06 14:23
Try Midol, I heard it helps with this issue...
_________________
|
Chewy Squirrel
Chief Marshal
Joined: January 27, 2003
Posts: 304
From: NYC
| Posted: 2013-01-06 15:02
I wonder, is there any facet of the game that RSM won't complain about?
_________________
|
Pantheon
Marshal
Palestar
Joined: May 29, 2001
Posts: 1789
| Posted: 2013-01-06 15:10
What the hell are you on about, there's been no nerf to UGTO. My brain hurts on so many levels reading that.
[ This Message was edited by: Pantheon on 2013-01-06 15:11 ]
_________________
|
Doran
Chief Marshal
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 29, 2003
Posts: 4032
From: The Gideon Unit
| Posted: 2013-01-06 15:17
Quote:
|
On 2013-01-06 15:02, Chewy Squirrel wrote:
I wonder, is there any facet of the game that RSM won't complain about?
|
|
lemme just check here and..
_________________
|
Achilles Lord of the Myrmidon
Grand Admiral
The Myrmidon Legion
Joined: December 15, 2009
Posts: 327
| Posted: 2013-01-06 15:38
Ok let me see if i can make this clear all I know is that my armour drops an average of 9.7 seconds faster than when i last playered this time last year. Now I might not have been around for previous patches as I was deployed and unable to play. I see that i have to retreat far more often then i did last year. And My weapons are far less effective than they used to be . Now maybe UGTO hasnt been nerfed but something has made the UGTO faction a lot less effective and consequentially we have been loseing quiet a bit.
@ DBS If you cant engage in a decent discussion or debate without contributeing in an intelligent manner, then please refrain from imputting your ideas. You'll sound a lot more itelligent that way.
_________________
There Are no Pacts Between Lions and men.
Signature size too large, please resize (600x200x100kb)
|
Abbot
Chief Marshal
*Renegade Space Marines*
Joined: December 23, 2007
Posts: 141
| Posted: 2013-01-06 15:40
Quote:
|
On 2013-01-06 15:02, Chewy Squirrel wrote:
I wonder, is there any facet of the game that RSM won't complain about?
|
|
UGTO is RSM, we cant help that pure and simple
_________________
|
Pantheon
Marshal
Palestar
Joined: May 29, 2001
Posts: 1789
| Posted: 2013-01-06 15:52
Quote:
|
On 2013-01-06 15:38, Achilles S-3 wrote:
Ok let me see if i can make this clear all I know is that my armour drops an average of 9.7 seconds faster than when i last playered this time last year. Now I might not have been around for previous patches as I was deployed and unable to play. I see that i have to retreat far more often then i did last year. And My weapons are far less effective than they used to be . Now maybe UGTO hasnt been nerfed but something has made the UGTO faction a lot less effective and consequentially we have been loseing quiet a bit.
@ DBS If you cant engage in a decent discussion or debate without contributeing in an intelligent manner, then please refrain from imputting your ideas. You'll sound a lot more itelligent that way.
|
|
It's all in your head, I'm affraid.
_________________
|
Talien
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: May 11, 2010
Posts: 2044
From: Michigan
| Posted: 2013-01-06 16:08
UGTO hasn't been nerfed but defenses for all 3 factions were given a massive rework a while back, and number values for all gadgets were posted. Weapon values weren't changed that I can remember aside from falloff being increased for Particle Cannons, so if you're mainly using Gunboat/BC/BD that may be why you feel your weapons are less effective.
_________________
Adapt or die.
|
zombat87
Admiral
Joined: March 23, 2008
Posts: 13
| Posted: 2013-01-06 16:19
General Balance Changes
* The repair rate on device in repair queue is capped now.
* All weapon damage (minus missiles and fighters) have had their damage reduced by 10%. Falloff on cannons has not been reduced by 10%, so as a result, UGTO and K'Luth cannons will not be as effective at long ranges.
ICC
* Gauss Cannon projectile speed increased significantly.
* Defence Mode removed.
* Active Shields: 5% hp increase.
* Reactive Shields : 5% regen increase.
* Shield regen increased by 400% when out of combat.
K'Luth
* Mining beams will now deactivate when cloaked.
* Implemented new cloaking system -- Cloaked ships can no longer be detected with ECM/ECCM pinging, instead cloak energy usage is based on the amount of signature being masked by the cloaking device. Additionally, if the cloaking device is engaged and energy level reaches zero the ship will begin taking internal damage to the device.
* Cloak energy cost decreased by 25% when out of combat.
UGTO
* Standard Armor: 5% hp reduction.
* Ablative Armor: 7.5% hp reduction.
* Improvements have been made to the death animations of Frigates, Destroyers, Cruisers, and Dreadnoughts.
Released: March 5th, 2012
_________________
|
Fattierob
Vice Admiral
Joined: April 25, 2003
Posts: 4059
| Posted: 2013-01-06 16:53
Quote:
|
On 2013-01-06 14:09, Achilles S-3 wrote:
I am not talking about ICC shields gettign a buff or K'Luth Chitnous armour getting a buff. Those changes were needed. Prior to those patches ICC did need a defense buff and Kluths Chitnous armour did need to be heavier.
|
|
Okay, so you agree those changes were required (Relative buffs to non-UGTO factions mean a relative nerf to the UGTO faction)...
Quote:
|
However, the nerf to UGTO in my OPINON did not need to happen. Heres Why:
While at the present UGTO maintians the most active player base our numbers alone do not out weigh a combined force of both ICC and K'Luth players. Which means Even if UGTO had the most players online we still would be outnumbered.
|
|
Sorry, we can't balance players numbers and we will never nerf or buff a faction because some people are currently playing it more then others. Furthermore, you're telling me that you have a majority of the playerbase, but when both other factions combine their forces you don't. And then you complain about it.
No. Stop.
_________________
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
