| Author |
1.674 |
DiepLuc
Chief Marshal
Joined: March 23, 2010
Posts: 1187
|  Posted: 2012-05-28 11:23
I hold my breath to read about new weapons!
As usual, we're eager to see it in beta, plus feel it.
What I wanna ask is, what do staff expect players to test in beta?
Object, condition, etc?
Any numberal deatails about the new backend falloff? It's very convenient if we know it here.
_________________
|
Pantheon
Marshal
Palestar
Joined: May 29, 2001
Posts: 1789
| Posted: 2012-05-28 16:11
Quote:
|
On 2012-05-28 11:23, chlorophyll wrote:
I hold my breath to read about new weapons!
As usual, we're eager to see it in beta, plus feel it.
What I wanna ask is, what do staff expect players to test in beta?
Object, condition, etc?
Any numberal deatails about the new backend falloff? It's very convenient if we know it here.
|
|
Falloff system change is more or less a simpler way for us to go about balancing weapons, but as always, testing is required and feedback to make sure I got the calculations right.
The old system worked by us specifying an exact amount of damage for the weapon to remove based on the life of the projectile. This would work in most cases, but in some it would result in edge cases of negative damage (which does nothing, if damage is less than 0 we don't apply it to an object, and we don't bother sending out damage notifications to the client).
The new system can do two things, the first of which works by us specifying a minimum damage amount for the weapon in percentage. We work this out as the following:
Lets say a weapon does 1000 damage, and has a falloff of 0.1 (float value). To calculate the falloff, we first calculate what damage we can effect.
falloff = 1000 * ( 1.0 - 0.1 )
The value 'falloff' is now 900 (90% of 1000), as this is the amount of damage we can change. We then work out how far the projectile has travelled and use it as a fractional ratio:
ratio = 1.0f - ( projectile life / maximum life )
(Maximum range is worked out as speed / max life, so all we need to do to work out how far the projectile has gone is divide how old it is by its maximum life - to get a ratio we can use, we take this answer away from 1.0)
Now that we have the age of the projectile as a fractional ratio, we multiply the falloff value from earlier by the ratio - this gets us how much damage we should remove. Once that's all done and dusted, we finally remove this value from the damage the projectile intended to do. So even if the projectile has reached its max range, it still has 10% of its damage in it.
The second way we can use this system is to define if we want it to work in reverse, although in a slightly different manner.
Reverse falloff now works as taking the % as a fractional ratio and increasing the damage against the life. So a reverse falloff of 2.0 would mean the projectile would do 200% damage at max range.
This allows us a lot more freedom when designing and balancing weapons as we don't need to calculate exact values and can let the game do it for us, and since it was doing the same thing before, it's not taken a performance hit. It also means we can now have weapons that increase damage at range!
We're trying to sort some issues out with the new weapons, but they should be in the next beta update.
[ This Message was edited by: Pantheon on 2012-05-28 16:41 ]
_________________
|
Silent Threat { Vier }
Marshal
Anarchy's End
Joined: August 03, 2004
Posts: 278
From: Waiting...watching...
| Posted: 2012-05-29 00:03
Is anything going to be changed with the shrouds in 1.674?
It seems odd to me that one of the two most popular ships at the moment for the close range faction is a missile dread. Some k'luth players seem to use almost nothing but a Ganglia anymore.
_________________
|
seyyah
Grand Admiral
Joined: April 01, 2010
Posts: 46
| Posted: 2012-05-29 08:51
will falloff effect ICC cannons and luth beams? or will they stay as theyre?
edit: as for sabots if theyre accepted as torpedo why they have arming range? even if theyre still rockets why an unguided weapon still needs a minimum firing range?
[ This Message was edited by: Roukanken on 2012-05-29 13:08 ]
_________________
former Roukanken
|
DiepLuc
Chief Marshal
Joined: March 23, 2010
Posts: 1187
| Posted: 2012-05-29 09:26
Can't test.
Server has crashed again and again in a very short period!
It has driven me nuts!
[ This Message was edited by: chlorophyll on 2012-05-29 09:33 ]
_________________
|
Silent Threat { Vier }
Marshal
Anarchy's End
Joined: August 03, 2004
Posts: 278
From: Waiting...watching...
| Posted: 2012-05-29 12:39
Quote:
|
On 2012-05-29 09:26, chlorophyll wrote:
Can't test.
Server has crashed again and again in a very short period!
It has driven me nuts!
[ This Message was edited by: chlorophyll on 2012-05-29 09:33 ]
|
|
yeah this happens to me also
_________________
|
Mylith
Grand Admiral
Faster than Light
Joined: July 19, 2011
Posts: 507
From: Hivarin, CD+36*15693
| Posted: 2012-05-29 14:15
Quote:
|
- General Game Changes
* New backend falloff system. Falloff should be based around the same levels as in release when compared to a cruiser (significant falloff changes to follow).
- * NEW WEAPONS!
- UGTO can now replace their Proton Torpedoes with Ion Torpedoes, which don't do quite as much damage but have a slightly better range and more importantly, a rudimentry tracking capability!
- K'luth can now replace their Antimatter Torpedoes with Psionic Torpedoes, which again don't do quite as much damage but launch 3 torpedoes at once and require no ammo to operate!
- ICC get the trusty SABOT Rocket back, this time as a potential replacement for Fusion Torpedoes. SABOT Rockets have been rebalanced to perform in a torpedo role.
- UGTO also get the Extended Range Laser, a long-range anti-fighter weapon.
- Armor and shields have had their stats heavily modified, skirmish shields are now back in the game. |
|
*pumps arms in general glee*
_________________
http://twitter.com/DarkSpace7
|
CM7
Midshipman
Faster than Light
Joined: October 15, 2009
Posts: 1812
| Posted: 2012-05-29 15:36
rockets seem to have a very finite range of opperation.
that intended?
they wont fire until target is within 100gu of their max range.
_________________
Defiance and Opposition, a tribute to teamwork. I will remember always
339,144
|
GunsOfHonor
Fleet Admiral
Joined: July 31, 2011
Posts: 191
| Posted: 2012-05-29 15:40
Quote:
|
On 2012-05-29 14:15, Persistance wrote:
Quote:
|
- General Game Changes
- ICC get the trusty SABOT Rocket back, this time as a potential replacement for Fusion Torpedoes. SABOT Rockets have been rebalanced to perform in a torpedo role.
- Armor and shields have had their stats heavily modified, skirmish shields are now back in the game. |
|
*pumps arms in general glee*
|
|
OMG YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES
Sabot is back baby
and Shields modified  hehehehhehe
cant wait *super excited*
_________________
|
Mylith
Grand Admiral
Faster than Light
Joined: July 19, 2011
Posts: 507
From: Hivarin, CD+36*15693
| Posted: 2012-05-29 16:35
My DS beta install goes to 8MB then hangs and changes to 'Not Installed'.
What's happening?
_________________
http://twitter.com/DarkSpace7
|
Jim Starluck
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: October 22, 2001
Posts: 2232
From: Cincinnati, OH
| Posted: 2012-05-29 17:01
Quote:
|
On 2012-05-29 08:51, Roukanken wrote:
as for sabots if theyre accepted as torpedo why they have arming range? even if theyre still rockets why an unguided weapon still needs a minimum firing range?
|
|
That was a decision made early in their redesign process, and in retrospect was a bad idea. The next time Beta updates they won't have any arming range.
_________________
If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger space battleship and try again.
|
Talien
Marshal
Templar Knights
Joined: May 11, 2010
Posts: 2044
From: Michigan
| Posted: 2012-05-29 17:40
Gauss: Still not worth using, took over half my ammo to kill a UGTO AI Frigate and it was still able to avoid a large amount of shots as close as 300 GU. If you need to be point blank to hit small ships with a weapon that's supposed to be specialized against them you're much better off sticking with Rails.
Sabot: Speed and damage are decent but they need more ammo, swapping Fusion Torps with 50 ammo for Sabot with 19 isn't really a good tradeoff.
Extended Range Laser: I switched all the CLs for ERLs on an EAD and was flying full speed repeatedly firing all the ERLs and my energy pool didn't so much as blink, they also do a respectable amount of damage compared with a standard CL and seem to have no falloff. Methinks they need some tweaking yet. 500 GU range is a bit excessive considering the whole point of having Fighters break off at 300 GU was to keep them out of PD range of the target ship and force people to fly PD for eachother.
.....And that was my objective look, now for my personal take on it.
After all the talk about Pulse Shield still being good at a 60% CHANCE to destroy each individual object in it's range despite the input from people who've repeatedly had it not destroy a single thing, and the general consensus being that people just have to use it intelligently against Fighters by having ships cover eachother an easy button against them gets handed out to the close range brawler faction? I checked my calendar and sure enough today is not April 1st so that can't be the reason, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who'd appreciate an explanation of why this is a good idea and how it will do something other than promote a return to planet hugging.
I'll leave the feedback on Ion Torps until I can find someone to help do a side by side damage comparison between them and Protons.
_________________
Adapt or die.
|
Critus
Chief Marshal
Joined: December 28, 2007
Posts: 52
From: kpo8914
| Posted: 2012-05-29 18:47
Why icc gets a lame sabot rocket? and ugto get a new cooler ion weapon (the only "good" thing icc has?. Icc should have a wep similar to the qst something probably lower range than the standar icc wep but with heavyer punch ideal for assault ships... in my opinion icc always gets the most common and less atractive modification?. This new release is going to fix the usefulness of the pulse shiled and the aux shield (too low hp)?. Ty.
_________________
|
Died~2000~Deaths[+R]*CC*
Chief Marshal
Army Of Darkness
Joined: February 08, 2010
Posts: 540
From: Spokane WA.
| Posted: 2012-05-29 20:49
how about less energy drain for kluth. was in beta and i was in a hive and redbandit in a siphon going against a battle station and ran out if energy pretty fast however the uggie battle station still had plenty of power but was running out of ammo. just a thought.
_________________
|
Painfulangel
Grand Admiral
Joined: December 26, 2009
Posts: 188
From: Exathra
| Posted: 2012-05-29 21:26
Quote:
|
On 2012-05-29 00:03, Silent Threat { Vier } wrote:
Is anything going to be changed with the shrouds in 1.674?
It seems odd to me that one of the two most popular ships at the moment for the close range faction is a missile dread. Some k'luth players seem to use almost nothing but a Ganglia anymore.
|
|
They use the Ganglia more now because of the energy nerf, the K'luth loose alot more energy now and the ganlia doesnt really use the larser... so it saves more energy
_________________
We may be forgotten, but we are not lost.
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
