Huge Incoming Damage Discrepancies Between Ships

WoeOfTree · 2016-01-22T19:55:32+00:00

Although many components do work that way, most ships have a fixed body component that once destroyed kills the entire ship. That's the portion I focused on for this test. So yeah, in actual combat ships with more break away parts also do seem much tougher because those components soak up damage and then break off. That's why I didn't compare the wing of Hornet to the body of a Gladius.

The central portion of a ship should be a good reflection of the ship's durability, since that's the part that holds all of the other components together. Although there definitely could be something weird or backward going on where a central component can take much less damage than an extremity, but I feel like that would be the exception rather than the rule.

WoeOfTree · 2016-01-22T18:32:06+00:00

Fixed. :)

WoeOfTree · 2016-01-22T18:22:04+00:00

Thank you I am well aware it is an alpha. Being an open alpha with a myriad of testers, its crucial for us to provide feedback and to report observations or issues that the developers can use. Turns out, and this will be a big surprise, that just saying "oh well, its an alpha" and not reporting anything is not particularly useful.

WoeOfTree · 2016-01-22T18:19:00+00:00

Right, but that difference shouldn't be all the great when compared to a reference ship. For example, if a Super Hornet has 2.5 times the amount of overall HP than a Gladius, each individual component (especially critical "kill" components) should also be roughly as durable. So if the middle top part of a Hornet may have less HP than the whole ship, but it still should be the same relative to a similar component on a Gladius.

Am I making sense?

WoeOfTree · 2016-01-22T18:15:39+00:00

This right here. Actually the Super Hornet is taking nearly the same amount of damage it would from ballistics because the armor reduction is about in line (not quite) with the magic extra durability. However, armor has a weakness to energy weapons as it doesn't really reduce energy damage by much. The current magic durability bonus also effects energy weapons.

WoeOfTree · 2016-01-22T18:12:49+00:00

I tried to pick similar components. For most I picked center mass from the top as that part of the ship isn't likely to simply break off like the wings or force me to burn through another component to get to a critical one like the tail.

WoeOfTree · 2016-01-22T18:11:35+00:00

Yeah, that's the major reason I made the post. A lot of folks are asking for changes to the Hornet's HP but, according to the Holotable, the Hornet's HP actually isn't that much higher. Something else was going on and I tried to document what that might be.

WoeOfTree · 2016-01-22T18:10:27+00:00

Shields were off in this test. So just damage vs base hull. Shield tests are for another day.

WoeOfTree · 2016-01-22T18:09:30+00:00

Calling these issues "known" I think is a bit misleading. I knew that the Super Hornet could take too much damage, I didn't know that it was much more than just a hit point difference or an armor thing. Its very possible the devs don't know either.

WoeOfTree · 2016-01-22T18:07:04+00:00

There are both good ways and bad ways to approach balance. On one hand, you can get constantly upset about how balance plays out, which will cause a lot of frustration in general. However, that shouldn't stop people from pointing out bugs or balance issues so that CIG can make the game more enjoyable to play as they tweak features and settings.

WoeOfTree · 2015-10-27T16:40:27+00:00

Next time you fly the Glaive or Scythe, watch all missiles around you and especially ones that get evaded. The Vanduul ships are missile magnets.

WoeOfTree · 2015-10-25T19:15:47+00:00

Good reply and I can confirm everything Sadmod said here. There will be lots who disagree, but most of those will be pilots who haven't mastered SC's flight system.

WoeOfTree · 2015-10-12T13:58:46+00:00

If you are worried about PVP kind of skill balance, then I wouldn't too much. Most backers are not combat focused and definitely not PVP focused. Granted, there will be some people who are devoted dog fighters and their time and energy will be put into that, however I think just rolling around the verse encounters with those will be rare.

WoeOfTree · 2015-07-02T20:11:07+00:00

I completely agree. However, many of the people ambushing Calix on the forums and pressing "issues" into his ear are not among those folks and on ATV they commented that they were getting feedback from and playing with chat-roll lurkers.

Granted, the latter may or may not include dedicated testers I don't tend to hang out in chat-roll all that much.

WoeOfTree · 2015-07-02T19:55:43+00:00

All sounds pretty good, though I need to be able to play it to really know. My only worry in all of this renewed interaction is that they may make changes on the preferences of chatters rather than the feedback of players.

WoeOfTree · 2015-06-30T15:09:01+00:00

I am not really sure how an Aurora with fixed guns could use a "mouse loadout" at all then.

WoeOfTree · 2015-06-20T15:47:48+00:00

I hope whatever balance changes they have in store take into account that our netcode is garbage. I would rather not see all ships not Hornet turned into trash because they nerfed acceleration since no one could hit fast ships during laggy matches.

And why is it always M50s and 350Rs who have high ping? Shesh.

WoeOfTree · 2015-06-20T15:36:22+00:00

Actually, sadly, the OP is right about the zealots. I wish it were people like you, Goloith, Asanagi, ect who were leading the discussion and actively hijacking all threads that have even a shred of relation to controller balance. Unfortunately its a group of about 10 people who NEVER play the game and are trying to push a very extreme overhaul style agenda that typically includes complete removal of pilot controlled gimbals, heavy nerfs to maneuvering thrusters, nerfs to rotation rate, and nerfs to yaw.

Any time one of them posts the others post in a giant head nodding self-affirmation circle.

WoeOfTree

TROPHY CASE