+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Forum: Discovery Mod General Discussion (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+---- Forum: Discovery Mod Balance (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=31)
+---- Thread: Fighter weaponry efficiency changes (/showthread.php?tid=205470)
Fighter weaponry efficiency changes - BobMacaroni - 10-31-2024
With 5.2's release there came to be several new changes, one of them being efficiency rates of fighter weaponry. While seemingly a smaller change, this grew to massively impact the balance of the mod, especially for fightercraft.
And it impacted it negatively.
While on paper it was a good idea, after seeing it implemented into the mod for some time now, something needed to be said about it. I have talked to, seen, and PVPed with over 20 different players since the release of 5.2 who have been discouraged from PVP, including three returning players who were very disappointed upon seeing the efficiency changes. It essentially made high velocity (lasers were hit the hardest) weapons unusable, and several people have stopped using lasers entirely, and some even paused playing the mod entirely, until something would change.
So, now that 5.2 has been up for a while, I believe that there has been enough time to test the new system. While I understand why the overhaul was enacted, the implementation does not work in its current form; it needs to be either toned down or reverted until a more permanent solution is found to the dilemma. Until then, I ask that the efficiency update is reverted, or at least dampened, for the time being.
RE: Fighter weaponry efficiency changes - Haste - 11-01-2024
We're making changes. For one, we're addressing issues in how efficiency affects different matchups (anti-cap performance, for one) by offsetting it with 'armor penetration', which I'm sure I can get into more in the future. I will say however that the intent with the efficiency changes was to:
- Increase fighter groupfight TTK.
- Make underperforming options (Let's say Lavablades compared to Vengeance) more appealing.
I don't really see a good reason to roll this back. We did a good bit of groupfight chase testing and everything from Fury 4 to Magnums was in a pretty narrow band of performance with the new values. If the values are decently good in that environment, where efficiency is king, it is pretty safe to conclude low efficiency loadouts are going to be absolutely fine in duels too.
However, the formula is ever-changing and we will no doubt tune things further, and we already have some changes slated for the next upcoming patch. Slightly increasing shield drain for fighters while gently bringing efficiency values closer together is something I might entertain, however, as that would bring the value of efficiency in duels and groupfights further together, while also having some potential to make peeling (or focusing multiple targets) more viable compared to dogpiling one person.
RE: Fighter weaponry efficiency changes - Oggdo Bogdo - 11-01-2024
The problem with the snub guns isn't the supposed relative performance of certain guns, whether or not it's in fleet fights. If it were, the players that left would be more willing to come to conn and have duels. They don't even want to come and play gunsos that are more casual.
The problem is that the game pretty much forces you to run out of core quickly when using certain guns. The further the deviation from 600m/s and 8.33, the worse the gun is hit. It's a type of prescriptive game design that forces you to pick the guns the devs want you to, and makes it clear that certain choices are not meant to be viable. It gives players the illusion of choice until they actually pick up and try the gun and realise it's totally unfun to use.
There are a few implications because of this. Just to be clear, I will speak only about the guns that have been nerfed, and not the guns that are similar, if not exactly, 600 m/s 8.33.
From a skill progression point of view, learning to manage your core in duels is something that rewards you immensely because you can put out more damage by saving your core for shots that are more likely to hit, and it feels great to still have a higher energy bar. Even if you manage your core properly and take only good shots, you still run out of core. There is perceivably less incentive from playing well and generally feels unrewarding.
From a stylistic point of view, you are punished for playing aggressive styles in duels that sustain firing for an extended period of time. You simply do not have the energy to keep firing. There are certain styles that allow you to do burst damage and then try to gain distance or run away so that neither side can interact with each other while powercores recharge. While I think it's hilarious that every insane patch that's come along recently buffs my playstyle, this type of style should not be incentivised at all.
From a ship balance point of view, higher powercore ships become so much more powerful and ships with extra guns lose all the advantage that comes from this trait. Traditionally, powercore is what determines a ship's damage output in group fights and the number of guns determined its damage output in duels. Now, the only thing that matters in both cases is powercore. Many ships in discovery that come with 5 or 7 guns usually come with extra advantages and disadvantages respectively to make up for this, and pretty much all the ships that are like this now have unjustified traits.
Now, as for the choice to nerf the efficiency of guns to supposedly make guns that underperform more appealing, there was nothing done to address the fact that the win condition with 600 m/s 8.33s in duels is entirely unreasonable. You are required to track your opponent for extended periods of time with basically the only speed in the game that is absolutely horrible for having high consistent accuracy with in all situations, and the guns don't even do nearly enough damage as they need to. The only thing that happened was that the win conditions of literally every other type of gun was made substantially harder to achieve. Now, every other gun feels just as unfun to play as 600m/s 8.33s and are on the same power level as these previous underperformers. This is obviously a blanket nerf to the entire class of snubs for the sake of a type of guns that nobody uses apart from a few weirdos and people who are just clowning on less skilled players. Had the DPS of 600m/s 8.33s simply been buffed, they would be more reasonable to play. In fact, this was a suggestion that is years-old at this point, but for some reason, there must always be a more delicate and intelligent solution than this and this will never happen.
It's akin to complaining that pig slop looks unappetising compared to a steak, but instead of serving actual food instead of pig slop, we'll just make the pig slop more appealing by rotting the steak. Well, nobody has to eat either, and they're just going to leave.
This isn't the first time there's been backlash about this. This is the exact same problem as the arc changes that were made. Guns are being forcibly turned off, which artificially raises the TTK of ships in a way that is unfun, only this time there is a different stated objective. There is clear overreach from a design perspective of wanting to raise TTK in group fight, into also making duels obnoxious to play. There is also an expectation, which cannot be helped, that you will run out of core in a group fight. It is not, however, something that you should be expecting to happen in a duel that is played correctly. Testing group fights and concluding that it's fine doesn't automatically let one conclude that duels are going to be in a playable state. In fact, the only thing that can be extrapolated is the relative performance of a gun, not whether or not it is actually good from a design perspective.
What's a real shame is that there was a lot of work and fine tuning that went into snub balance both in guns and ships pre 5.0. But the absolute carelessness and laissez-faire attitude with changing core mechanics, such as ship strafing, shield on/off powercore recharges and across-the-board efficiency nerfs, have thrown it all away in a year. You'd think one would have some respect for their own work.
RE: Fighter weaponry efficiency changes - Haste - 11-01-2024
(11-01-2024, 12:49 PM)Oggdo Bogdo Wrote: ... 600 m/s 8.33s ...
They're the ones that shifted the most, yes, but they're hardly the only symptom of the problem. Dublin Dusters and Trefoils, which are actually fairly high DPS options, often (used to) get swapped out for higher alpha or higher velocity options. Magma Hammers are far more common than Lavablades. Vengeances, too, are far more common than Lavablades. And Lavablades are really far from the worst gun you can grab, as they're still pretty punchy per shot which helps a lot at lower velocities. The reality is that any sort of middling-to-high refire, slow-ish gun has historically been used very little and deemed weak.
For the record, I do believe that playing around with the DPS of unpopular (and popular) weapon archetypes is something we should strongly consider, and I am in fact fully aware that Fury 4s are incredibly niche and that every gun in the game would have to use infinite energy for most people to consider them. However, that still means that the formula should weigh things correctly, and that the absolute worst weapons (super low DPS, 600 m/s 8.33s) should have massively higher efficiency than the most desirable options. Once that's in place, we can start "taking the edge off": bump up the DPS of outrageously efficient options, possibly lower the DPS of the most inefficient ones. Prior to our recent formula changes, the reality is simply that the gap between various archetypes was too small. If Magma Hammers and Lavablades do similar DPS at similar levels of efficiency, Magma Hammers are generally simply better.
(11-01-2024, 12:49 PM)Oggdo Bogdo Wrote: There is also an expectation, which cannot be helped, that you will run out of core in a group fight. It is not, however, something that you should be expecting to happen in a duel that is played correctly.
I agree with you, but also believe that "playing correctly" involves not boxing for fifteen seconds at a time with a 7 QUASAR Barracuda. Powercore management is inherently a lot easier in duels, and should definitely be part of the game. That bar is there for a reason.
Regardless, there's some additional funny parameters being added into the formula, and efficiencies are generally going up again in the next patch -- though the gaps between "undesirable" and "desirable" weapons (EXCALIBURs and PHOENIXes, or something) are also growing a little bit, to try and keep pushing people into exploring literally anything but 750 8.33 and 600 2.0. Shield drain, which you don't seem particularly fond of, is also going up a bit, which might help make groupfights a little more dynamic while also ensuring powercore is a finite resource in duels.
RE: Fighter weaponry efficiency changes - L1ght - 11-02-2024
Bring back ol powercore, I'll buy you a large pizza I promise.
RE: Fighter weaponry efficiency changes - BobMacaroni - 11-02-2024
(11-01-2024, 12:51 AM)Haste Wrote: We're making changes. For one, we're addressing issues in how efficiency affects different matchups (anti-cap performance, for one) by offsetting it with 'armor penetration', which I'm sure I can get into more in the future. I will say however that the intent with the efficiency changes was to:
As efficiency is already rather unimpactful in fighter duels compared to groupfights, increasing the efficiency of the worse-performing options was obviously not going to change much. It took superhuman effort to run out of power while running an 8.33 750 loadout pre-patch. So, the logical play is to take the most popular, cookie-cutter options down a notch, which we did.
- Increase fighter groupfight TTK.
- Make underperforming options (Let's say Lavablades compared to Vengeance) more appealing.
I don't really see a good reason to roll this back. We did a good bit of groupfight chase testing and everything from Fury 4 to Magnums was in a pretty narrow band of performance with the new values. If the values are decently good in that environment, where efficiency is king, it is pretty safe to conclude low efficiency loadouts are going to be absolutely fine in duels too.
Contrary to this line of reasoning, the most impacted environment was duels, not groupfights. The (largest) problem people had was with low efficiencies running out ridiculously quickly in duels with the lower efficiency weapons, and not being able to get more than a few hits off their shield before running completely out of energy. From what I've observed, the hardest hit were newer to average players trying to use laser weapons, but without the aim to be able to hit every shot to actually do something before running square out of energy. Lower refire rates are also much harder for less experienced players to use, which is counterintuitive to the "make snubs easier to learn" mindset, as well. You don't need to "box for 15 seconds with a QUASAR barricuda" to run out of energy. While no one is arguing powercore management shouldn't be a part of the game, we are arguing that you shouldn't need to have excellent powercore management to be able to use a simple, non codename weapon adequately.
"Underperforming" weapons will always be a thing, no matter what you do. And thats actually a good thing. I've seen plenty of people using what you considered to be "underperforming" weapons before 5.2, and use them very effectively. I myself actually had quite a fondness for Dublin Dusters and Trefoils. Lower speed didn't equal a worse weapon, just a different playstyle, and could be used very effectively. I've seen them used very effectively.
A better solution I believe would be to buff the weapons individually or in groups, say give them a slight damage increase and a slight decrease in higher weapon efficiency, instead of changing around every single fighter weapon in the game, and creating a massive disparity.
Even slightly increasing the efficiency of higher damage weapons would provide a much more tolerable and bearable solution. But at the current rate, it isn't gratifying to even use anything with a higher speed than 650 m/s, and it feels more like being a slave to constant powercore management (and still running out of energy) than feeling in any way equal or engaged using higher speed weapons, and being able to have fun using them.
RE: Fighter weaponry efficiency changes - Tenshi Kuonji - 11-02-2024
(11-01-2024, 12:51 AM)Haste Wrote: We're making changes. For one, we're addressing issues in how efficiency affects different matchups (anti-cap performance, for one) by offsetting it with 'armor penetration', which I'm sure I can get into more in the future. I will say however that the intent with the efficiency changes was to:
No, please no!!
Armor Penetration?
Man, stop nerfing capital ship players, take a reality, NO SOLO FIGHTER/BOMBER SHOULD ALONE TAKE DOWN A CAPITAL SHIP -_-"
Any ship spend 1/2 to 1/3 of energy regen for shields barely work and last more than few seconds...
To make you that shields are doing nothing and will get 'armor penetration' stop using whatever you use and ask all devs preferably fix the bugs instead of continuously modify the game...
Instead making a proudful CAPITAL ship useless start making right ship tiers where heavier mean better in power and guns but badly in agility, while snubs should provide cover or in certain reasonable amount making them really hurt a capital ship (a bunch of fighters or bombers should make the fall of capitals, but not just 1 or 2)
RE: Fighter weaponry efficiency changes - StellarViss - 11-02-2024
Sabre vs Bismarck