Trading needs to be harder | Ideas

[Page]

at that point you are directly selling power, thats never a good thing for a game thats already hurting in playerbase.

Yea, for credit features I prefer helper functions, for which I have a few ideas of things that can be implemented but are not required in the game (for instance being able to buy an instant refresh all button for minefields - it makes life easier, but doesn't add anything not already possible)

Again, if the PPL had 100% accuracy, then a 75 drone minimum launch would make sense. Weapons miss, so do drones ffs its not that complicated. Your entitled to your own opinion but not your own reality.

Basically what I was going to say, minimum damage on a weapon is always 0 (well unless you have a high acc weapon such that it is always 100%, possible but not often used), minimum damage on drones is normally higher than 0, so by your reasoning drones should actually have a much higher rating than weapons. This doesn't make any sense and doesn't seem to have been thought through properly.

4) 2 second delay between buying and selling goods. This would make the average time at a port 10 seconds compared to now which is 6/8 seconds.

I'm not against this, but I would keep the delay lower, 1s at most (it would feel incredibly frustrating otherwise for sure), on a side note the way I would do it would help to reduce the difference between players with fast/slow internet (ie stop people paying for an advantage), at the same time I don't want to make things slow without reason.

5) Hunter class ships should have acc bonus. I'm not suggesting that it only be against traders and I'm not suggesting that wbs should have an acc bonus against hunters.

They currently already have this, although it's a minimal difference such that the lower number of weapons would negate any advantage most likely, but they do have a slight acc bonus.

Something else that can be done to make hunting somewhat easier (and slightly more tactical) is that green sectors are only set when hitting mines (such that dropping a mine IS on a trader would mean they have to hit mines to leave).

A related alternative to that would be to have dropping mines clear the green sector, but that would have to be tested more extensively for balance: can you drop a mine, shoot, drop another mine and repeat in order to keep the trader in sector whilst you take multiple shots? (it also has an effect on clearing minefields - you could drop mines on people trying to clear so they can't run when you enter)

(I think both of the green sector changes were mentioned by Pickles already, but not really discussed)

[silverx2]

we had the dropping a mine clearing the green sector before. It was heavily abused by hunting duos. one would just drop singles the other would just fire. it makes it impossible to escape.

[Page]

That makes sense, in which case it's a no go really, however only setting green sector when you hit mines could still work as that way dropping mines can only be used to keep someone in sector once.

[the570z]

Again, if the PPL had 100% accuracy, then a 75 drone minimum launch would make sense. Weapons miss, so do drones ffs its not that complicated. Your entitled to your own opinion but not your own reality.

Basically what I was going to say, minimum damage on a weapon is always 0 (well unless you have a high acc weapon such that it is always 100%, possible but not often used), minimum damage on drones is normally higher than 0, so by your reasoning drones should actually have a much higher rating than weapons. This doesn't make any sense and doesn't seem to have been thought through properly.

Ok, let me try and explain it another way. You have a fight between an ITAC and a ship with an HHG. The ITAC launches right around 50 drones every shot. Thats about 300 damage. The HHG misses twice and hits on the last shot(33% acc). They both do 300 damage in three shots.<--- This is the theory
Reality:
In a match between a cara and an ITAC with both at 30k xp. The ITAC only launched less then 50 drones ONCE in eight shots, the cara was armed with a nuke and an HHG. The results were as follows(stopped on kill shot for cara): ITAC 1248 damage>Cara 1050.
Current attack rating for drones=
5/17 OUTSHOOTS a 15/13<-- this is broken
Make sense now?

[JettJackson]

Again, if the PPL had 100% accuracy, then a 75 drone minimum launch would make sense. Weapons miss, so do drones ffs its not that complicated. Your entitled to your own opinion but not your own reality.

Basically what I was going to say, minimum damage on a weapon is always 0 (well unless you have a high acc weapon such that it is always 100%, possible but not often used), minimum damage on drones is normally higher than 0, so by your reasoning drones should actually have a much higher rating than weapons. This doesn't make any sense and doesn't seem to have been thought through properly.

Ok, let me try and explain it another way. You have a fight between an ITAC and a ship with an HHG. The ITAC launches right around 50 drones every shot. Thats about 300 damage. The HHG misses twice and hits on the last shot(33% acc). They both do 300 damage in three shots.<--- This is the theory
Reality:
In a match between a cara and an ITAC with both at 30k xp. The ITAC only launched less then 50 drones ONCE in eight shots, the cara was armed with a nuke and an HHG. The results were as follows(stopped on kill shot for cara): ITAC 1248 damage>Cara 1050.
Current attack rating for drones=
5/17 OUTSHOOTS a 15/13<-- this is broken
Make sense now?

Why are you using an argument of a cara armed with a HHG and Nuke, that is an impossible arm. No cara is flying with only 2 weapons ever, If you want to sell the argument use reasonable reasoning instead of this failed logic here. Also I agree drones need changing for attack rating, but I don't think we need an entire rewrite of all the weapons with respect to attack rating. We need to stop reinventing the wheel here and over-complicating a simple problem with ridiculously large solutions. Let's try the easily changed things first that I have stated about 10 times in this thread that people just ignore first and then if those don't work we can try one of these overcomplicated solutions.

[the570z]

Because you said drones are much weaker then a level 5 weapon and if they were going to have the attack rating of one then they should hit for a minimum of 150 every time. I pointed out that a ship with 2 level five weapons cannot outshoot an ITAC with just drones.

Why should we come up with some arbitrary number for drones, what possible reason is there to take a system that has almost no effect on actual game play and make it overly complicated and confusing. Why not make one simple formula and rate every single weapon based on it. Then everything will make sense and the attack ratings might actually become a useful stat for determining how strong your ship is vs another one.

[the570z]

Oh and by the way I ran a fight with even xp against every mid racial with even exp and everybody armed with pulse lasers. Wanna guess what the results were?

Here is a shocker, the ITAC never once got below /7, the vindicator had trouble even getting into drones and its supposed to have an advantage against ikkies... Go prove me wrong before you start yapping about how everything is perfect.

[JettJackson]

Because you said drones are much weaker then a level 5 weapon and if they were going to have the attack rating of one then they should hit for a minimum of 150 every time. I pointed out that a ship with 2 level five weapons cannot outshoot an ITAC with just drones.

Why should we come up with some arbitrary number for drones, what possible reason is there to take a system that has almost no effect on actual game play and make it overly complicated and confusing. Why not make one simple formula and rate every single weapon based on it. Then everything will make sense and the attack ratings might actually become a useful stat for determining how strong your ship is vs another one.

I was just commenting on what sufex said, I wasn't using what he said as being correct. I personally agreed with it if we were going to make other changes to the Ikky ships

[JettJackson]

Oh and by the way I ran a fight with even xp against every mid racial with even exp and everybody armed with pulse lasers. Wanna guess what the results were?

Here is a shocker, the ITAC never once got below /7, the vindicator had trouble even getting into drones and its supposed to have an advantage against ikkies... Go prove me wrong before you start yapping about how everything is perfect.

Thats not how you kill an Ik'thorne ship. Anyone who has played this game for any length of time knows you make the Ikky ship hit mines then you shoot it.

No offense but your condescending tone towards me and others who disagree you on these threads has ran its course also, might be best to dial that back a bit.

[the570z]

I was just commenting on what sufex said, I wasn't using what he said as being correct. I personally agreed with it if we were going to make other changes to the Ikky ships

How can you agree with something that you agree(???) is incorrect? I am now very confused.