Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 71
05-22-2011, 11:38 AM
Is the issue here really a lack of 'rock/paper/scissors'-style balance, though? What I see is an extremely refined rock being used to beat both scissors and paper, such that it requires an extremely tough paper (not just any paper) to beat the rock.

And let's not forget that the ultimate deciding factor in a fight, regardless of rock/paper/scissors builds, is weapons. Or, more precisely, objects and not abilities. Objects (like ships and ship weapons) are certainly modified by abilities, but without those objects to begin with, the abilities are meaningless.

At an even higher level, luck could be considered the ultimate deciding factor in an otherwise stalemate scenario. After all, critical hits -- although modified by abilities -- still depend on the Random Number Generator.

More precise to this specific discussion, I mean Engineering power-heavy builds used to counter the Science power-drain builds. It can be done, and it does require as much teamwork and coordination from both sides, to the point where it will come down to whomever can keep up their weapons power long enough to blast the other side.

===

I think the real issue here is whether or not the extremes of rock, paper, and scissors builds are quantifiably equivalent to allow objects (or RNG) to be the ultimate deciding factor.

I personally believe it would take a lot more research in a controlled and recorded environment (like Tribble PTS) in order to determine if this is indeed a valid concern. Such a test would require a scripted, step-by-step runbook of the tactics needed for each extreme build, to be executed by the same testers, repeatedly. It would also require minute tweaks to certain steps, one at a time to determine impact. The same would then need to be repeated for each tweak to a build.

This is not impossible, but it is currently unfeasible given 1) Cryptic's lack of resources, and 2) players' general unwillingness or inability to do this themselves.

===

My point is, it's important for players to test and submit quantifiable feedback.

I don't speak for Cryptic, but as an IT professional I can say that, if I were in their shoes, I would want as much hard data as I can get. Qualitative feedback is OK, but tends not to have nearly the same impact as quantitative feedback.

Qualitative: "this is broken because I don't like this, fix this, kthxbye" == BAD

Quantitative: "this might be broken because ABC data shows this result for XYZ number of times we tried it, please investigate, kthxbye" == GOOD

Most basic to any discussion would be the establishment of what the issue is (from a high- or strategic level -- root-cause analysis), and why this issue is important.

It might be good to suggest possible solutions, but always keep in mind both upstream and downstream short-, mid-, and long-term consequences -- the 'impact' of any change.

===

So I might suggest that the real issue here is limitless stacking of ABC abilities, as referenced by XYZ logs. And I might suggest a possible solution of diminishing returns on such stacking, with the note that this might lead to rock/rock/rock stalemate instead of rock/paper/scissors endgame.

===

Did anyone find any of this helpful to this discussion?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 72
05-22-2011, 12:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by staalker View Post
The issue is that some skills come off as hard to beat in PvP. They need to have two sets of stats for skills. Almost every successful pvp game does that. You have one set of effects and stats for PvE and another for PvP.

You can't nerf powers too much because of PvP or it break them in PvE, and vice versa.

No just no. It is a very common myth that this is somehow important. But the fact remains, every time we have seen it in this game, if people find a power is overpowered in PVP, it is most definitely overpowered in PVE.

In any other game with separate skill sets you now double the workload for balancing, you completely mystify newbies to PVP with a bunch of stuff that doesn't even do what they learned about in PVE, and the PVE balance suffers even more because no one cares if you stomp all over NPCs, unless other players start suffering because of it.

"No dude, we don't want a sci, scis suck, go roll a Tac so you can join us in this STF." At that hypothetical point, the balance issue is very far off target, especially if there aren't highly competitive PVPers to ferret it out early.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 73
05-22-2011, 10:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foxrocks
No just no. It is a very common myth that this is somehow important. But the fact remains, every time we have seen it in this game, if people find a power is overpowered in PVP, it is most definitely overpowered in PVE.

In any other game with separate skill sets you now double the workload for balancing, you completely mystify newbies to PVP with a bunch of stuff that doesn't even do what they learned about in PVE, and the PVE balance suffers even more because no one cares if you stomp all over NPCs, unless other players start suffering because of it.

"No dude, we don't want a sci, scis suck, go roll a Tac so you can join us in this STF." At that hypothetical point, the balance issue is very far off target, especially if there aren't highly competitive PVPers to ferret it out early.
To piggy back Fox here in this game is is damn near impossible to break a skill for PvE. I levelled a toon with mark IV gear, mk IV yeah took a while but that is PvE for you. Trying going into LG pvp with mk IV gear and see how effective you are.

The PvE in this game needs nothing more than level one of all skills.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 74
05-22-2011, 11:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt_Dravis
[b]I
My point is, it's important for players to test and submit quantifiable feedback.

I don't speak for Cryptic, but as an IT professional I can say that, if I were in their shoes, I would want as much hard data as I can get. Qualitative feedback is OK, but tends not to have nearly the same impact as quantitative feedback.

Qualitative: "this is broken because I don't like this, fix this, kthxbye" == BAD

Quantitative: "this might be broken because ABC data shows this result for XYZ number of times we tried it, please investigate, kthxbye" == GOOD

Azurian, take notes, please.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 75
05-22-2011, 11:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by thamupp View Post
Not true, even if you target your self there's a big chance (with scramble 3, especially) that it will jump to another target that's visible 'on screen'.

edit: if you're really quick i think the f1+st works not sure though :p
I've used it hundreds of times without it ever "slipping" to another target. I've offered it as a solution that works for me. You are free to take it or leave it.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 76
05-23-2011, 10:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stromgold View Post
+1

People cry "spam" because most science abilites are very visable. GW, TR, ES, CPB, FS, etc all have large graphic effects on screen that makes them very noticable.

Whiners are going to whine and call for nerfs. It seems to me that the very vocal minority of whiners beg for nerfs and eventually get them, while the quiet majority seem to suffer for it and adjust as best they can.

What these whiners don't realize is that no matter what changes are made, good teamwork and strategy will always win. Its the losers who can't plan and work well together that always cry "foul".
In fact, Strom, I found my build and your build to be extreemly "balanced" in the 1 v 1 matches we did a while back. Sci, which is now being called OP, and a FaW beamboat which was (and to some) still are also being called OP ended up in a "dead heat". I used your build to test my getting rid of the snare break and still survived.

Altho, in the 1 v 1 evening we all did, even with our "OP" ships, we had many an escort that we all had "draws" with also. Was quite an "eye-opening" evening for me at least.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 77
05-24-2011, 02:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Esquire View Post
In fact, Strom, I found my build and your build to be extreemly "balanced" in the 1 v 1 matches we did a while back. Sci, which is now being called OP, and a FaW beamboat which was (and to some) still are also being called OP ended up in a "dead heat". I used your build to test my getting rid of the snare break and still survived.

Altho, in the 1 v 1 evening we all did, even with our "OP" ships, we had many an escort that we all had "draws" with also. Was quite an "eye-opening" evening for me at least.
1v1 is the worst way to test if powers are overpowered in this game.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 78
05-24-2011, 04:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by matteo716 View Post
1v1 is the worst way to test if powers are overpowered in this game.
I disagree. Since we are talking about Science here, I'll use that. A single Sci ship will have a very hard time spamming you with the same skill. When you get two or three ships together, that changes. Most people would say that PSW is very balanced these days. But it's abusive when you get it from three or four players.

So we nerf PSW more to make it less viable to a team, then it's practically useless unless you are using it as a team.

The issue with Sci spam is easily solved, as I have said, with immunities. If I hit you with a PSW, you get stunned. There should be a period of time after that in which PSW can't stun you again. Say 10 seconds. That way, the sceond ship coming in can't PSW and Tricobalt you again.

Adding these resistances and immunities will make multiple ship attacks of the same skill. Then people would see the issue isn't that these skills are imbalanced, it's that they are imbalanced when they are chained.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 79
05-24-2011, 06:34 PM
The problem with any ship-wide stun is seen every day in PvP. It's called the BoP burst. If you PvP agaiinst Klingon's you know what I'm talking about.

Stun powers should be removed or there should at least be a counter power.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 80
05-24-2011, 07:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by staalker View Post
I disagree. Since we are talking about Science here, I'll use that. A single Sci ship will have a very hard time spamming you with the same skill. When you get two or three ships together, that changes. Most people would say that PSW is very balanced these days. But it's abusive when you get it from three or four players.

So we nerf PSW more to make it less viable to a team, then it's practically useless unless you are using it as a team.

The issue with Sci spam is easily solved, as I have said, with immunities. If I hit you with a PSW, you get stunned. There should be a period of time after that in which PSW can't stun you again. Say 10 seconds. That way, the sceond ship coming in can't PSW and Tricobalt you again.

Adding these resistances and immunities will make multiple ship attacks of the same skill. Then people would see the issue isn't that these skills are imbalanced, it's that they are imbalanced when they are chained.
Uhh, there already is a stun immunity for PSW and Tricobalts that lasts for 8 and 15 seconds respectively.

And there are already hard counters to stuns, Auxiliary to Inertial Dampeners makes you immune to stuns and repels.

Adding more resistances and immunities will simply render Teamwork between science ships useless. You'll be pretty much relegating the second science ship to a support healer or to using powers that have no synergistic value with the rest of the team.

Its like saying, I should get resistance or immunity to attack patterns after they've been used on me since I've seen them before, and with the gold fish like memory of my Officers, they should be able to remember that pattern for 10 - 15 secs and know how to avoid it. Which is of course ludicrous. Or saying that oh, hey look he just got another extend shields, since i saw that before I should be able to ignore the second one (to deal with chaining shield resists). Lets take it further and say that I should get resistances/immunity to energy weapons types without the Aegis set, cause my tactical officer should be modulating shield frequencies all on his own (to deal with pew pew chaining).
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:14 PM.