Star Conflict OBT v.0.9.2 Discussion

[7445062]

I actually took a week off competitive play in T4 and decided it is time to level up 3 branches from R1 to R11. I was totally ignoring Empire before. I had x/12/12 in the old system, so I started there. For a week of not so much play time I managed to get R1->R8 on all 3 branches. I guess 1 more week and I will be R11 with those 3 branches as well (if I gain the credits), so I will have total of 10 ships in T4 (R10 not counted) to use.

 

So even with my frustration about progression it is not THAT bad when you actually go back and play it.

 

question: did you have to grind all of the synergy from scratch? and also loyalty?

 

according to my calcs, it’s 18 hours to grind R1-R6 (2 factions), and another 20 hours for R7-R19 (x2 for 2 factions) = 58 hours.

 

that is 20-30 days playing 2-3 hours per day.

 

if you finished it in a week it means you must play 3x4 times as much.

 

in other words: average 8 a day?

 

you should provide these details… otherwise it is misleading and/or ambiguous.

 

tldr; it seems that casuals or player who play 2-3 hours per day are being punished in terms of progression simply because people farm 12-24 hours per day.

 

you will never be able to take an average that suits all players… you need diminishing returns on rewards, which decrease with play time.

 

basically, boost the first 2-4 hours and reduce everything after that proportionally.

 

currently, the entire system is backwards. it rewards people who grind more than 6 hours per day.

 

in fact, i can see instances where this system is leading to undue pressures on children, especially on F2P accounts, where they must play even more to obtain the same rewards as their friends.

 

bad for society, bad for kids. good for profits?

[4242384]

the only thing ludicrous about it is how you keep repeating this tired old saying without backing up your claims.

When you talk about basics stuff, like Black and White, do you provide a support with wave and particle theories, theory of relativity and such? No, you don’t, its common sense, many things here are common sense/ experience from other PvP games.

 

your usual squadmates? that’s funny, why would we ask players who have a vested interest to maintain the current meta so they can abuse it?

just like you have an interest in maintaining the current looting system, since you have an advantage for having played this game for months.

a) New looting system is better than it use to, majority of veterans spend they time in older looting system

b) In majority cases where loot does exists it is directly tied up to time spend in game, then to the skill.

c) As it has been stated many-many times gear accessible via loot only is insignificantly better than gear from shop, it doesn’t affect gameplay in higher tiers in anyways (I would agree though that in t2 have some impact, but by the time you acquire it  you will be flying t3+, where it next to  doesn’t matter

 

what does damage have to do with anything? irrelevant. it’s an IDDQD boat. plus, they seem to do enough damage for me, when i fly them… so… shrug…

How is it an IDDQD ship when it can hardly kill more then 1-2 classes in game solo in any meaningfull time frame, there are classes that can easily kill 50% of other classes, how are the not IDDQD?

 

 

already stated, name one FPS (or third person class-based shooter) where stuns are acceptable (no, stun grenades are not stuns, they are slows)…

So why all other Role based PvP games can have stuns (100x amount of Star Conflict btw, gameplay just as fast and dynamic, with even shorter decision making/reaction times) and yet 3dPS can not, what about those RPG MMOS focused on PvP, most of them aren’t truly 3dPS, but some of them are very-very close to that, good example are Guild Wars 2 - 99% of skills available has to be FPS style aimed, and position/LOS/dodge/movement just as important as any FPS, than there were those Age of Conan, there are some Dota like games in 3dPS setting as well (never research those though, but pretty sure there are hard disables there as well)

 

people complain about stunlocks in LoL all the time. in fact, that’s pretty much all they complain about.

Last time i had a look at LoL (more then .15 year ago, it had ZERO hard disables, due to “not fun” philosophy, only soft disables such as immobolize/slows (i wonder when did they change they policy) on other hand every 3d hero in DotA had hard disables in way, it is a major part of a gameplay, and there is nothing wrong with it, btw on paper some of those sound ridiculous and new players always qq about that, while in game there are countermeasures to those moves.

 

also, ECM is unchanged… i flew it for 5 games just to test, and it still feel exactly the same as before, as in: OP.

No one is stating that ECM is perfectly balanced, i for once still think that energy drain is wayyy to strong, i for one is up for a change in the way it works, change it to percentage based, instead of flat number. According to a description, it drains about 300 energy per second, while interceptrs have 60-70 regen per second, unless it suppose to completely negotiate interceptors. But mechanics arent wrong, I would love to see more modules with ability to interrupt channeling effects, it makes the game that much more tactical.

 

— i don’t know why people keep using ‘off topic’ arguments to try push through their ‘ECM is fine’ ideology… the only argument here is this: 2 disables, 1 cc and 2 conditions = broken. also, no counters till R8… every other ship has counters… except ECM.

If you remember T1 and T2 are considered to be a training zones, that are quite fast skippable, it is very obvious that Devs balance process is mostly focused on t3+ and t2 gets the short stick from those changes (not that i agree with the process, but in the current state of the game you can not put t1-2s in balance arguments, and r8 is quite early when you keep this in mind.

Every other ships doesn’t have a counter to EVERY OTHER ship, some ships have direct counters to another “some” ships there is no class that is countered by everyone, and there is no ship that is countering everyone. (I hate 1v1 examples, but good indication of direct counters are what role(build/modules) can consistently kill another role(builds/modules) in those encounters, ECMs are very good against other fighters, and meh against frigates or interceptors)

[Kine]

you will never be able to take an average that suits all players… you need diminishing returns on rewards, which decrease with play time.

 

basically, boost the first 2-4 hours and reduce everything after that proportionally.

Agree. Complements F2P well. But you have a habit of making these occasional good points off-handedly. These ideas should be in their individual suggestion posts properly elaborated. I would do it but I can’t be arsed.

 

Every other ships doesn’t have a counter to EVERY OTHER ship, some ships have direct counters to another “some” ships there is no class that is countered by everyone, and there is no ship that is countering everyone. (I hate 1v1 examples, but good indication of direct counters are what role(build/modules) can consistently kill another role(builds/modules) in those encounters, ECMs are very good against other fighters, and meh against frigates or interceptors)

 

Rock > Paper > Singularity hasn’t been really defined eversince I started and no one here; despite possessing the required game knowledge, ever came forward and suggested how it can be made to look like. Jasan skirted around the topic here and there but didn’t quite explained it whole. Betatrash I know disagrees and is against specific unit counters. Me - I love these roles and believe it should be fine-tuned once and for all. 

 

And it should be done. Look at them xyz is OP posts that appears regularly every patch. As long as roles aren’t clearly defined and players can see what counters what (if it even can) - blind arguments will always fill up this forum.

[6704587]

This. The earlier statement that ECM do not promote teamplay is outright ludicrous. ECM is best utilized in a squad, as this class is able to provide active support and protection for your team.

 

Ask my ‘usual’ squad mates; semTex, Ravender, Kipps, ZapBrannigan, etc. how often it happens in our squads that they shout ‘guys I have this <insert class> on my tail’ - followed by a ‘Jammed/Stasis’ and ‘turn around & shoot’ or ‘gtfo!’ based on the situation seen by the ECM.

 

Really it’s one of the most team-supportive roles out there and stating anything else is born from a thorough lack of understanding in regards to the current game mechanics and existing meta.

 

 

This happens absolutely in every match.

 

In my opinion in its old style the ECM was way too strong. It deserved the nerf. Not because the ECM was/is able to disable my ship completely. It simply lasted to long.

The stasis is a simple “stun” as we can see in every other MMO/RPG/MOBA. And i never heard someone seriously complaining about a stun in LOL or DOTA(2). Maybe only about its strength or length. It is a tactical element.

 

If the nef was too hard!? Time will tell. But for now you have to think very carefully about which target you pick. You have to wait for the right moment. The role of the ECM shifted towards (hard) support. It is not an offensive ship on its own anymore, like a CovertOps or a Recon (to stay in the same ship size).

 

No more easy kills with the ECM. This is where most complains have their root.

 

 

 

Point is in moba u actually have a way to counter stun based tactics (the team healer focus heals on the stunned mate for example).

 

here u just haven’t. 

 

If they catch a teamate of ur in stasis hes death. U can just watch.

 

They should basically introduce countermeasures for stasys so… if they wanna leave it ingame (direct heal modules, removers for inhibiting effects exetera).

 

Or at least change stasys to make its target invulnerable for stasys duration… this way it becomes a defensive modules rather than a free team kill module.

 

Or … and that’s my favourite: remove it and replace with something else.

[7445062]

b) In majority cases where loot does exists it is directly tied up to time spend in game, then to the skill.

c) As it has been stated many-many times gear accessible via loot only is insignificantly better than gear from shop, it doesn’t affect gameplay in higher tiers in anyways (I would agree though that in t2 have some impact, but by the time you acquire it  you will be flying t3+, where it next to  doesn’t matter

 

How is it an IDDQD ship when it can hardly kill more then 1-2 classes in game solo in any meaningfull time frame

 

and yet 3dPS can not, what about those RPG MMOS focused on PvP, most of them aren’t truly 3dPS, but some of them are very-very close to that, good example are Guild Wars 2 - 99% of skills available has to be FPS style aimed, and position/LOS/dodge/movement just as important as any FPS

 

No one is stating that ECM is perfectly balanced, i for once still think that energy drain is wayyy to strong, i for one is up for a change in the way it works, change it to percentage based, instead of flat number. According to a description, it drains about 300 energy per second, while interceptrs have 60-70 regen per second

 

If you remember T1 and T2 are considered to be a training zones, that are quite fast skippable, it is very obvious that Devs balance process is mostly focused on t3+ and t2 gets the short stick from those changes (not that i agree with the process

 

(I hate 1v1 examples, but good indication of direct counters are what role(build/modules) can consistently kill another role(builds/modules) in those encounters, ECMs are very good against other fighters, and meh against frigates or interceptors)

 

inb4; loot isn’t tied to anything. it is loosely tied to game-time, wins, salvage rate, attempts, etc… but the nature of probability means that the whole process is completely RNG-based. it could take 4 years to obtain a certain mod (if you want to consider that tied to time, so be it… but the time is not ‘fixed’… it is a set of probabilities).

 

inb4; 5-10% is significant, especially when the player with more time/experience in game has them. it creates imbalances. in the case of 2 equally skilled players, it still makes a difference… but an even larger one in the previous example.

 

inb4; how is comparing boats 1v1 a fair assessment? in gang fights, ecms can disable the target you’re focusing = guaranteed death… it’s like god mode, which specifically refers to the ability to play god with your engines, modules, thrusters and weapons, on top of IDDQD invulnerability from metastable.

 

inb4; fps don’t use stuns because taking control away from a player/preventing them from defending themselves isn’t considered ‘skill-based’. furthermore, losing control in a fps situation is frustrating to the player being disabled, since they can do absolutely nothing to prevent their death which occurs in 2-3 seconds. 5 if you’re lucky. you still won’t outlive the disables.

 

inb4; rpgs are something else, but if you look carefully at every rpgs skillset, you’ll notice that stuns/kd have MULTIPLE counters, some of which render you immune to them completely. in some rpgs, stun/cc/invulnerability durations are reduced for pvp modes (guild wars 1), because pve requires a whole different set of tactics/balance.

 

inb4; pvp modes in rpgs are based on a level playing field: all players have access to the same gear. same goes for FPS games.

 

about the energy absorber rate… you are right, now that i think about it. it’s the same reason that healing is OP on inties. because they heal way faster than frigates as a percentage of their health. so you will never balance frigs/inties/engies until you balance those issues first. but… their requires a change to the game engine… not likely, in fact…

 

inb4; it’s fine if t1 and t2 are ‘training zones’… but why should those training zones be overrun by players with gear and broken ships in squads stomping on all the new players, encouraging them to quit? zero sense does this make.

 

you hate 1v1 examples, yet you use a direct 1v1 example. quote - “How is it an IDDQD ship when it can hardly kill more then 1-2 classes in game solo in any meaningfull time frame” ;p

 

Betatrash I know disagrees and is against specific unit counters. Me - I love these roles and believe it should be fine-tuned once and for all. 

 

i don’t disagree with specific counters. but the counters should be slightly less pronounced. so you don’t end up with guaranteed no-win situations.

 

Point is in moba u actually have a way to counter stun based tactics (the team healer focus heals on the stunned mate for example). here u just haven’t. 

 

If they catch a teamate of ur in stasis hes death. U can just watch.

 

yes, even LoL has some better counters to stuns (but chain cc are still impossible to counter, due to long cooldowns on cleanse and other anti-cc skills, while the CC skills have really short cooldowns in some cases). so if you bait the cleanse, you can chain-cc to your heart’s content. some champs have cc counters, like kayle’s ult, support classes for healing, etc, or innate bonuses like orelia/olaf as mentioned.

 

well, you have some counters. you can basically try to disable/shut down some of them before they kill your teammate. you’re basically using the same broken tactic vs them… hence why ECM actually COUNTER/break teamwork.

[4242384]

inb4; 5-10% is significant, especially when the player with more time/experience in game has them. it creates imbalances. in the case of 2 equally skilled players, it still makes a difference… but an even larger one in the previous example.

 5-10% on a module does not directly converts into your ship performance, having a module that have 10% better resistances is hardly translated into 1% tackiness of your ship, a single shot miss or crit proc negotiates this difference 10 folds and negotiations like that happens all the time. 5-10% in Active modules is never translated into direct 5-10% performance increase in battle because your target is not a target practice dummy and you do not rely single handedly on modules and weapons, HUGE part is playing timings, piloting, surroundings and how you position yourself within it, a better position or engagement from better angle will absolutely negotiate all the small benefits that comes from those percents. There are no engagements where both opponents are in equal “in power” position at the beginning of the engagement.  The full experimental ship probably will have 5% overall better performance in each aspect of the ship over mk3, but the higher the tier the less and less that number is. And what is more important is that that “advantage” has less even of theoretical impact on the outcome the higher the tier. On top of that because it takes that long, and probability to have everything in short period of time is so small, that by the average theoretical time to acquirer all that gear for the ship you would be playing 3 tiers higher and when you play at higher tiers we get back to my original point where that “advantage” has less and less meaning, that boils down to pure skill of a team.

 Out of my 1100+ games i have yet to encounter a single game where it was that close that it was decided by a gear, not a single game, even those small games like 4v4 where gear advantage would be most noticeable due to less random matchmaking and squad vs squad, yet, not once was decided by gear. 

 

inb4; how is comparing boats 1v1 a fair assessment? in gang fights, ecms can disable the target you’re focusing = guaranteed death… it’s like god mode, which specifically refers to the ability to play god with your engines, modules, thrusters and weapons, on top of IDDQD invulnerability from metastable.

When one team knows that there is an ECM on enemy side, why would you ignore it and not accommodate for it with a counter on your side? ECM would be IDDQD IF there would be NO counters whatsoever. You don’t even have to bring an ECM to counter that. Same goes any other class (Good example “frig ball” in current state - it can be powerful IF your enemy does not counter play it with heavy dmg to penetrate, and just inty spawn)

Same with other role based games 

Do people bring Healers to the game? yes, most of the time does it make them OP? and same goes for every role, some roles might be in more demand than others in current balance state of the game, which, if the game is under devs attention, will always evolve into something else.

 

 

 

inb4; fps don’t use stuns because taking control away from a player/preventing them from defending themselves isn’t considered ‘skill-based’. furthermore, losing control in a fps situation is frustrating to the player being disabled, since they can do absolutely nothing to prevent their death which occurs in 2-3 seconds. 5 if you’re lucky. you still won’t outlive the disables.

inb4; rpgs are something else, but if you look carefully at every rpgs skill set, you’ll notice that stuns/kd have MULTIPLE counters, some of which render you immune to them completely. in some rpgs, stun/cc/invulnerability durations are reduced for pvp modes (guild wars 1), because pve requires a whole different set of tactics/balance.

Movement in and ability to act is important in every single game, it is not limited to FPS, in Mobas 5 man team can be decimated in 1-2 second if it got caught out of position by  1-2 enemy players on specific roles, is it op? on paper - yes? in the game hell no. Limiting importance of movement to a FPSs only is ignoring or maybe not having enough experience in other type of PvP games, it is as important or even more (considering the speed at what you can die in those games)

 

inb4; pvp modes in rpgs are based on a level playing field: all players have access to the same gear. same goes for FPS games.

FPS - pretty much yes

 pvp modes in rpgs - yes, but those are designed around PvE/Single player experience, and PvP just an addition to that. Those that based on PvP are more complex in a sense of gear/skills/builds/team composition and such. Not every one of them does it the same with the same gear to everyone.

 

inb4; it’s fine if t1 and t2 are ‘training zones’… but why should those training zones be overrun by players with gear and broken ships in squads stomping on all the new players, encouraging them to quit? zero sense does this make.

This was discussed many times, and it is mainly a limitation of a size of a current player base.

 

you hate 1v1 examples, yet you use a direct 1v1 example. quote - “How is it an IDDQD ship when it can hardly kill more then 1-2 classes in game solo in any meaningful time frame” ;p

Because as soon as you go to team vs team encounters, if you didn’t bring modules/tactics/ships w/e as a counter it is your teams fault, not enemies. So 1v1 is the only situation where GOD mod of a ship can be reviewed. (of course if a single ship has no counters in team based play and roll over the whole team it is OP/IDQQD/GOD w/e, but ECM mechanics are not it) Keep in mind that i am talking about ECM mechanics to not be OP, but raw numbers/durations of those effects. More offencive control effects create faster gameplays.

 

[7445062]

 5-10% on a module does not directly converts into your ship performance

 

a single shot miss or crit proc negotiates this difference 10 folds and negotiations like that happens all the time

 

because your target is not a target practice dummy. 

 

Limiting importance of movement to a FPSs only is ignoring or maybe not having enough experience in other type of PvP games, it is as important or even more (considering the speed at what you can die in those games)

 

pvp modes in rpgs. Those that based on PvP are more complex in a sense of gear/skills/builds/team composition and such. Not every one of them does it the same with the same gear to everyone.

 

So 1v1 is the only situation where GOD mod of a ship can be reviewed.

 

stats are stats. resistances are the only things reduced due to diminishing returns. and yes they do directly convert to ship performance.

 

now you’re mixing luck into an equation where it doesn’t belong. luck applies to you as well as to the enemy.

 

now you’re mixing skill into the equation once again. already mentioned: let A = skill one, let B = skill two. if A = B, then A/B = 1, hence you can’t get an advantage based on skill.

 

limiting importance of movement in FPS?.. uhm… lack of experience? facepalm… i’ve been around since before he internet, already mentioned… maybe you should inquire to all the FPS makers as to why they don’t include these broken mechanisms in their games…

 

and the point about gear being, that all gear is available to all competitors (it’s not RNG/luck based in RPG PVP modes). not about what builds are being used…

 

nope, ECM is even mode ‘god’ in squads than it is solo…

[3011647]

stats are stats. resistances are the only things reduced due to diminishing returns. and yes they do directly convert to ship performance.

 

now you’re mixing luck into an equation where it doesn’t belong. luck applies to you as well as to the enemy.

 

now you’re mixing skill into the equation once again. already mentioned: let A = skill one, let B = skill two. if A = B, then A/B = 1, hence you can’t get an advantage based on skill.

 

limiting importance of movement in FPS?.. uhm… lack of experience? facepalm… i’ve been around since before he internet, already mentioned… maybe you should inquire to all the FPS makers as to why they don’t include these broken mechanisms in their games…

 

and the point about gear being, that all gear is available to all competitors (it’s not RNG/luck based in RPG PVP modes). not about what builds are being used…

 

nope, ECM is even mode ‘god’ in squads than it is solo…

Except for the fact that you should never be in a situation where A=B. It’s a team game, understand that, also, you never fight in a vacuum, there’s a plethora of variables you insist and insist of not including. Such as cover, objectives, positioning, game state, etc. It’s a team game, you’re individual skill will only go so far, you’re supposed to adapt to your team’s composition as well as your enemy’s. this renders all of your extremely simplistic and idealistic theorycrafting of 5-7% advantages completely irrelevant in a real game.

 

Which as you’re so fond of telling us, you’re not involved in.  

 

When people say there are “lies, damned lies and statistics” this is precisely what they’re talking about. 

[6362164]

Except for the fact that you should never be in a situation where A=B. It’s a team game, understand that, also, you never fight in a vacuum, there’s a plethora of variables you insist and insist of not including. Such as cover, objectives, positioning, game state, etc. It’s a team game, you’re individual skill will only go so far, you’re supposed to adapt to your team’s composition as well as your enemy’s. this renders all of your extremely simplistic and idealistic theorycrafting of 5-7% advantages completely irrelevant in a real game.

 

Which as you’re so fond of telling us, you’re not involved in.  

 

When people say there are “lies, damned lies and statistics” this is precisely what they’re talking about. 

 

Statistic has less impact on individual case, but it applies on long period of observation of various cases.

 

You have thousand of matches happen everyday, 5-7% advantages is relevant, and it will decide the outcome of many matches.

 

Look at the patch notes, not only from this game, but also from other games, you can see that the majority content of patches are minor changes in statistic, but those affect the game as the game developers want it to be.

 

The same apply for items advantage. One match, it proves nothing, but after 1000 matches, you will see the differences.

[7445062]

pretty much, since the individual cases should technically average each other out. that’s another way of putting it.

 

other factors don’t belong in a gear comparison anyways though, since the same can be applied to either party. so you just cancel them out :\

 

in other news: still no more T2 experimentals. failed 6 more attempts ;o well more, but i only started tracking 6 units ago…

[2978877]

Statistic has less impact on individual case, but it applies on long period of observation of various cases.

 

You have thousand of matches happen everyday, 5-7% advantages is relevant, and it will decide the outcome of many matches.

 

Look at the patch notes, not only from this game, but also from other games, you can see that the majority content of patches are minor changes in statistic, but those affect the game as the game developers want it to be.

 

The same apply for items advantage. One match, it proves nothing, but after 1000 matches, you will see the differences.

If after 1000 matches, I see a consistently noticeably large difference in personal performance in 20-40 and maybe 1 or 2 get actually decided by gear difference, which is currently the case, I’m fine with it. It’s within margin of error.

 

The biggest problem is the fact that people attribute their failures to anything else - gear, corps, squads, sun spots. You name it, people attribute their failures to it just so that they can feel good about themselves. “It’s not that I played badly - it’s GEAR!”

 

Reality is that vast majority of those “omg gear” moments are actually “I played badly” moments, and gear differential may have bought the guy who failed an extra second of life running away, after which he would have died anyway. In most cases, it doesn’t even give you that. And cases where it actually decides the single kill are very rare. And cases where it decides the GAME are all but unheard of.

 

 

I’ll leave you with an anecdote of a guy who I met a couple of weeks ago in game. It was 3v3, we were all randoms and faced a full ESB squad. This guy picks his fighter, flies in a straight line right at enemy squad, gets melted in about 3 seconds and then comes the “omg op singularity” whine in main chat. Since the game was obviously lost due to our utter lack of skill (games against good full squads need 3 skilled team mates willing to teamplay, and we obviously didn’t have that) I replied with “do you realize that they could have killed you just as well with lasers?”. Moment of silence, then comes another explosion: “well, it’s OP, and also they have blues”. My reply: “they could have laser mk1s and you would’ve still died just as fast”. He: “maybe you’re right, but they’re still in T5s”. Me: “they’re could’ve been T3s and they would’ve melted you about as fast, do you realize you solo rushed into three enemies who teamplay and just focused fire on you?”.

 

Long silence followed. Then, a minute or so later came “well, I still think that that gun is overpowered, but I can see your point”.

 

Which is the reality for mental process of most players. Blame everything but your own mistakes. It’s easier that way. Hence the gear excuse, the tier excuse, the squad excuse, the sun spots excuse and countless others. Where in most cases, the actual deciding factor in the game is skill differential between two teams and everything else is in the error margin. To even claim otherwise you’d have to have those really close games that are already rare, have two teams with really similar skill levels on top of that but have those teams have wildly different gear levels. Games that fulfill these conditions all at once are exceedingly rare.

[4242384]

To even claim otherwise you’d have to have those really close games that are already rare, have two teams with really similar skill levels on top of that but have those teams have wildly different gear levels. Games that fulfill these conditions all at once are exceedingly rare.

I would like to add to this:

Those criterias will never meet in any tier below t3, next to impossible in t3 and have a some chance in t4+. Simply due to the process of acquiring all those items, you will naturally progress into higher tiers. Unless you are “skillful enough” to stay in t2 utill the end of time, and stomp the hell out of new players, that has nothing to do with skill.

[Kine]

you forgot DPI on their mouse is higher, better headphones, latest GFX card, lower ping, higher FPS, hotter girlfriend, tighter jeans.

[6362164]

@Luckyo: what you stated is partly true, and I have to say that a lot of arguments here polarize everything while everything in fact, is not, especially at later Tiers.

 

-There’s always learning curve, a player will get better/ more experienced/ better map awareness/ better understanding of game’s mechanic the more he spends time in the game. You don’t say this player is entirely bad/ good, what you should say is what he has learned through playing the game.

 

-Same applies for a play style/ objectives of a player, a player who plays suicide tactic/ aims for kill, DSR/ plays LRF  has impact on the how a match flows. You can say that in theory they shouldn’t play like that, but they are there, and will always be there, on your side, or the enemy’s side, or both. And human can’t stay focus 100% of the time, even you will make mistakes, not in one match, but will in many matches.

 

-What you  guys expect does exist, but not in pub matches, you can only expect high level of teamwork, strategy, focus, skills in competitive matches where everyone trains himself explicitly for one single match. But what we are talking about here are thousand of matches with thousand humans, and near infinite situations, which can only be managed by statistic.

 

 

And I have to say that I myself believe competitive players also rely a lot on statistic, and have a very high tendency to exploit advantages of game mechanic to the max, thus, dev also has the tendency to rely on competitive matches to decide the outcome of patches.

[1078853]

Will you guys ever stop arguing that gear thing? Here, I’ll summarize it for you:

Team play > individual skill > gear

That also means that if team play and individual skill are on equal levels, it comes down to gear. Or in other words: Gear matters, individual skill matters and team play matters.

There you go, you are all correct. Next topic please.

[5427863]

You dont half moan do you betatrash ??

 

One simple counter to ECM is shoot them in the face and destroy them - Works for me most times

[3522870]

I have to say, gaining statistics to improve games is lovely, and helpful for the game designer, but it never is the only source of balancing, that is still the human mind and it’s creative ideas to add more needed complexity and remove unwanted complexity; as is math only helpful to simulate an ideal condition, as are statistics helpful in proving theories but easy to misread.

 

I really recommend anyone who wants to argue about balance, theorize what should be done in the game, etc. to at least read this very short wikipedia article, and understand the position we are at, as players of a game. I really feel tons of words could be saved, by simply understanding, that things might not be as simple, as we perceive them to be, and keep discussions more constructive.

 

Team play > individual skill > gear

 

this.

 

of course skill is relative to or impacted by the time of day, the hardware used, the internet connection, health, mood, and other various personal conditions, so it’s not a constant factor. the only constant factor is gear, and it has the least impact.

[6362164]

What else all we gentlemen here can do but propose theories? We all go around and around and around theory this theory that, to theorize or not theorize, human is such a complex but simple creature.

 

Just let dev do their job.

[1078853]

What else all we gentlemen here can do but propose theories? We all go around and around and around theory this theory that, to theorize or not theorize, human is such a complex but simple creature.

We could whine a bit again. For example about the lag that makes even level 1 contracts appear to be on a timer:

Or the reward system that makes my Dwarf 2, which I had backspaced within the first 5 seconds without as much as moving it, earn more synergy than my Hydra 2, which got a few kills and a bunch of assists in a very short CR match: (hint: Dwarf 2 is elite, Hydra 2 not, but it’s still silly)

Or … well, this is depressing, we should rather talk about fish again:

:01515:

[6820689]

you forgot DPI on their mouse is higher, better headphones, latest GFX card, lower ping, higher FPS, hotter girlfriend, tighter jeans.

Do you have any idea how hard it can be to target using a wireless trackball along with 160+ network ping?

 

Anyway, matchmaker affects win/loss ratio a lot, and gear’s meaningless without a decent team working together.  It’s more often I get into a smaller match and I’d just wish I had different ships in my combat slots.  That’s a different type of gear.

 

Or the reward system that makes my Dwarf 2, which I had backspaced within the first 5 seconds without as much as moving it, earn more synergy than my Hydra 2, which got a few kills and a bunch of assists in a very short CR match: (hint: Dwarf 2 is elite, Hydra 2 not, but it’s still silly)

 

That’s just…wtf?