You cannot just cut 50% of the damage off base defence turrets without also changing the deflection values of the base hitting ships! This is INSANE.
And the countermeasure change is even worse, their ratio of effectiveness even with this alleged bug still requires the defender to use multiple turrets and an equal number of ships to shut down that single weapon type. If you're cutting their effectiveness by a substantial margin, you will totally remove countermeasures as a viable option, and thus utterly destroy the prizes that people have been working hard for in the previous bounty events. You know, in addition to the turrets that you are also destroying that people worked hard for.
If you want to permanantly put the vast majority of people off ever trying to compete in PVP ever again, this update is the way to do it.
And that's even without considering how badly this countermeasure stupidity is going to hit PVE.
"Best of luck, Captains! And may the odds be ever in your favour..."
Raids Boycotted: Hellstrike, Lightning Carrier, Enforcer, Neptune- and at this rate, the entire upcoming Reaver raid series.
Congratulations on addressing an issue you were informed of over 2 months ago. Now as someone who was involved in player driven testing of the turret damage it is quite easy for me to see the reduction in damage that will be caused with this change. However where as before an executioner turret built for maximum damage with 8 T7 turrets in the group would put out damage as follows.
374766/2*1.35*1.31*1.25*1.5*1.15^5*1.25^8/2 = 3724567.36 damage to the hull after 50% turret defence. A difficult number to balance and rightly needing to be reduced.
However what you've proposed is making the T7 bonus additive instead of multiplicative thereby changing those damage numbers to
374766/2*1.35*1.31*1.25*1.5*1.15^5*2/2 = 1249757.42 damage applied to a hull after turret defence.
What this means is you are in effect negating missile turrets against missile cruisers even before additional armour has been equipped. The same can be said of ballistic turrets against the impact cruiser without me needing to bore you with the math. All one needs when designing an attacking fleet is add armour to counter the opposite faction to either of these hulls and one need never worry about a turret when attacking a base ever again.
I urge you to please consider that adopting this step without implementing change in the armours you've since released will only result in a massive swing in the opposite direction making turret designs irrelevant to base defence. I think you've done untold damage to the pvp community without further aggravating the situation.
If you wish to any further advice on how to do so please feel free to contact me.
I should also add i look forwards to being able to participate in the aspects of the game I enjoy in 20 days time. Until then I feel it's only right to curtail my participation.
For someone who's so routinely condescending about the design of the game, I love the fact that there are two things missing from your calculations:
1. Faction bonus. Yeah, it's only 20%, but when bonuses are compounding like they do, it adds more than it sounds like it would.
2. Your second calculation only factors in a 100% turret group bonus. The actual bonus of 200% in reality makes the final damage 1874636.13 if excluding the Faction bonus.
You, as well as a number of others in this thread, also fail to take into account that only two damage types for turrets have been released so far. By focusing only on "now", there's absolutely no notion of what the bigger picture may be. For instance: As more damage types are covered, and we all know there will be, it'll be harder and harder for attackers to cover all turret compositions. While it may be painful in the short term to swing the pendulum back to attackers, I see that as being more recoverable than the current situation. And, toward the end of the T7 era, could make for an interesting Attacker/Defender puzzle.
Personally, I would have liked to see a full suite of damage types released, then a new set that escalated on those while pairing armor upgrades, etc. But that's just me.
The faction bonus was deliberately omitted as the only area where it will be relevant were if the two new ballistic were added. Then the effect would be only impact cruisers are relevant in the course of base hitting. That would again present another problem in the swing mechanics. As for the mathematical error in calculation that was immediately corrected some time before you posted but my point still stands. Making the game so the only viable hull for base attacking is the one just released and it itself takes zero damage from turrets is not a good way to provide balance and sustainability to the pvp environment.
Also I appreciate you may well be looking forwards to the next turret type in the mean time those of us who only play to pvp have been sat on our arses for the last month or two and now we have to wait another 3 weeks
dont even waste your time explaining stuff in PvP when 90% of bp don't even PvP. but now that we are getting nerfed turrets now its a big deal and all of a sudden everyone is PvP players lol
i guess the noobs who can't build a guard fleet will be crying bc their insta kill turrets wont be able to defend against everybody. lmao
Guess you think you guard that can only give pass-through and over damage any better than anyone elses boy? LOL,, talk about noobs,, unless of course you getting better bonuses from kix than the normal person.
i guess the noobs who can't build a guard fleet will be crying bc their insta kill turrets wont be able to defend against everybody. lmao
Guess you think you guard that can only give pass-through and over damage any better than anyone elses boy? LOL,, talk about noobs,, unless of course you getting better bonuses from kix than the normal person.
i guess you're one of the noobs who only rely on insta kill turrets. its ok B-Rad, broken pixels never hurt anybody.
kixeye plan is back to death of 1000 cuts but deflection is over 40x more than thEn. when it was implimented , the fix is a diaster for those who won and built turrets. EACH TURRET must have its own value we paid for. The plan kixeye propsed is so flawed. A TOTALLY. A HARD RESET TO WHERE PVP AND PVE SPLIT IS THE RIGHT COURSE. As this fix just makes bases farms because of deflection. go back to resistance not deflection.
Nerf one single turret and it will be my last day. What you are doing is illegal. You cannot continue to sell people a BMW and then take it back and say here is your Pinto.
I agree with Tool on this one. You nerfed the mortars once. You would think the powers to be would know basic math now when you design something. Again we coin something that is in itself a design flaw that Kix created and we are the ones that pay the price. Pretty sure this will push me out of the game. Think I have had enough of the bait and switch that goes on here.
Congratulations on addressing an issue you were informed of over 2 months ago. Now as someone who was involved in player driven testing of the turret damage it is quite easy for me to see the reduction in damage that will be caused with this change. However where as before an executioner turret built for maximum damage with 8 T7 turrets in the group would put out damage as follows.
374766/2*1.35*1.31*1.25*1.5*1.15^5*1.25^8/2 = 3724567.36 damage to the hull after 50% turret defence. A difficult number to balance and rightly needing to be reduced.
However what you've proposed is making the T7 bonus additive instead of multiplicative thereby changing those damage numbers to
374766/2*1.35*1.31*1.25*1.5*1.15^5*2/2 = 1249757.42 damage applied to a hull after turret defence.
What this means is you are in effect negating missile turrets against missile cruisers even before additional armour has been equipped. The same can be said of ballistic turrets against the impact cruiser without me needing to bore you with the math. All one needs when designing an attacking fleet is add armour to counter the opposite faction to either of these hulls and one need never worry about a turret when attacking a base ever again.
I urge you to please consider that adopting this step without implementing change in the armours you've since released will only result in a massive swing in the opposite direction making turret designs irrelevant to base defence. I think you've done untold damage to the pvp community without further aggravating the situation.
If you wish to any further advice on how to do so please feel free to contact me.
I should also add i look forwards to being able to participate in the aspects of the game I enjoy in 20 days time. Until then I feel it's only right to curtail my participation.
For someone who's so routinely condescending about the design of the game, I love the fact that there are two things missing from your calculations:
1. Faction bonus. Yeah, it's only 20%, but when bonuses are compounding like they do, it adds more than it sounds like it would.
2. Your second calculation only factors in a 100% turret group bonus. The actual bonus of 200% in reality makes the final damage 1874636.13 if excluding the Faction bonus.
You, as well as a number of others in this thread, also fail to take into account that only two damage types for turrets have been released so far. By focusing only on "now", there's absolutely no notion of what the bigger picture may be. For instance: As more damage types are covered, and we all know there will be, it'll be harder and harder for attackers to cover all turret compositions. While it may be painful in the short term to swing the pendulum back to attackers, I see that as being more recoverable than the current situation. And, toward the end of the T7 era, could make for an interesting Attacker/Defender puzzle.
Personally, I would have liked to see a full suite of damage types released, then a new set that escalated on those while pairing armor upgrades, etc. But that's just me.
The faction bonus was deliberately omitted as the only area where it will be relevant were if the two new ballistic were added. Then the effect would be only impact cruisers are relevant in the course of base hitting. That would again present another problem in the swing mechanics. As for the mathematical error in calculation that was immediately corrected some time before you posted but my point still stands. Making the game so the only viable hull for base attacking is the one just released and it itself takes zero damage from turrets is not a good way to provide balance and sustainability to the pvp environment.
Also I appreciate you may well be looking forwards to the next turret type in the mean time those of us who only play to pvp have been sat on our arses for the last month or two and now we have to wait another 3 weeks
Omitting pieces of data to make your point just undermines what you're trying to say. As for "my point still stands", you specifically called out that the MSC would soak all of the damage without any armor. The correct calculation proves that to be false. For "viable" hulls, that goes back to only being 1/3 of the way through an entire cycle. IC has no pen deflect, and (if they follow the pattern) whatever comes after will have no pen OR bal deflect, meaning you'll be forced to specifically armor it for that. Which, huzzah, you can already do with the Onslaught if you like. And if whatever turret type comes after ballistic turns out to be concussive or explosive, the Onslaught is an even better option in theory. So I can't really agree with the whole "only viable hull for base attacking is the one just released" line of reasoning.
Mind you, I'm not saying the turret change is a perfect fix, just pointing out erroneous math and how I imagine (maybe foolishly) the overall T7 PVP space will change after the fix, and in subsequent months.
Kixeye, I admire you all for what you are trying to do but you need to do one thing before you put these changes out. You need to test them. And not just by Kixeye employees in the test environment. You need to invite some of the top hitters and defenders in the game today. Then you need to let them play with these changes using there ships and bases for a few days. Have them try everything and see what this does. If it pushes the pendulum the opposite way to much, tweek it and let them play some more. Doing this will not solve all the issues of this release but at least it would be better than just throwing it out there and pissing off 75% of the players.
all they nerfing is their very own player base, this is ineptitude at it's finest and one has to wonder if this is even legal anymore
It is not legal to bait and switch and that is exactly what we have here. I am also sure my response will be screened and not posted which is why I am videoing every attempt I make to voice my opinion and concerns as a consumer of this company.
Just a random thought. Its absurd, but its valid. By no means am I making a threat. Its a legit analogy. If I shoot someone, I cant take the bullet back. You put this crap out there, we took it and are adapting. Instead of trying to recall your bullets, find a way to make this better with new tech, OR, brain power. This is a FUCT up attempt at fixing your mistakes
all they nerfing is their very own player base, this is ineptitude at it's finest and one has to wonder if this is even legal anymore
It is not legal to bait and switch and that is exactly what we have here. I am also sure my response will be screened and not posted which is why I am videoing every attempt I make to voice my opinion and concerns as a consumer of this company.
sadly this while i do agree this is bs its not bait n switch bait and switch has to happen at the point of sale and this did not we have been using these items for awhile so its just another nerf
all they nerfing is their very own player base, this is ineptitude at it's finest and one has to wonder if this is even legal anymore
It is not legal to bait and switch and that is exactly what we have here. I am also sure my response will be screened and not posted which is why I am videoing every attempt I make to voice my opinion and concerns as a consumer of this company.
sadly this while i do agree this is bs its not bait n switch bait and switch has to happen at the point of sale and this did not we have been using these items for awhile so its just another nerf
Didnt someone say these turrets were working as intended at one point? If thats the case, this would be considered a recall. With all recalls Ive dealt with, there was some kind of compensation
once again another stupid knee jerk reaction were sick and tired of yall screwing up and just making up crap and throwing it out here you havent tested any of this and now you propose to simply nerf crap once again after players have made adjustments for what you have existing Way to go Kix lets see how many more folks you can run off with you half baked ideas
My question where is the base that can not be bet in game? I still see most bases getting leveled by the newer ships that come out. Is there bases out there that are hard to bet yes, but some have figured out how to do it. So where going to switch the favor back into the ship that is hitting the base nice.
I have paid to build my base & fleets to try & keep up with current conqueror fleets and now I hear you are going to nerf the turrets.. I built my base to balance out in the game at the time. If your going to nerf the turrets I would like to be reimbursed for what I spent to get this base & fleets at to where it is. No where is it legal to take something sold & change it after the fact. You need people do your software straigth. Have you noticed all the abandoned bases? Nerf my turrets and I will join the abandoned too. But I will try to get reimbursed for what was done here such as the Better Business Bureau
i call bs on this statement this is just kix way of lying so they can nerf our bases and think we are going to be fine with it all because of the big cry babies fleets getting hurt taking damage or being killed i have seen the new impact cruiser from pops1 player able to sit in the channel of some of these top bases for a long time being pounded on and taking the damage killing some bases and not making it in others so i know if built right it can be done and if you nerf our bases turrets and antis then you will have flip it back the other way 100% because this ship can already take the damage pretty good and will be able to smash (walk) bases once again with all the high tech in them and not take much damage at all and for any of you that tried saying that new impact cruiser wasnt going to be any good i can say your full of it i have seen it first hand with my own eyes so you say you heard our feed back and attempt to use this lie as a way to nerf our bases again now your hearing more feed back from the other half of the players so now you will need to nerf the ships and armors they use to balance it again we and our bases shouldnt be punished for us working hard to get the toys and tech to make a strong base
This could make sense... if they showed us the rest of the picture. Its been teased, but we really don't know what is coming or when. The change doesn't happen until 6/26 (yes, on the eve of bounty) BUT what if they drop something into the raid next week - something like a couple Super Pholgistan turrets, that does about a mil in radioactive damage. This is the strategy they've been teasing, but have taken forever to get to. Once a third damage is introduced, base hitters will be forced to chose how to equip armor to deal with bases. Right now, basers are 3 MC panels and 2 MC2 panels without exception, leaving ship vulnerable to most anything other than ballistic and penetrative; the third damage type will force strategy and hopefully make things interesting.
Like i said, it really is up to them to save it. I think I see how they are going to do it... but, no base will survive bounty if nothing new is introduced between now and then.
I have a hard time believing that we are dealing with a company that is brilliantly scamming us AND entirely incompetent.
This is a private company in a capitalist market trying to make money - your money. Give it to them, or don't - but don't fault them for trying.
We have heard your feedback regarding the imbalance of Player vs Player (PVP) combat and want to share some information about the upcoming Player vs Player (PVP) rebalance and bug fixes. These changes are slates for the 8.26 release, which is expected the week of June 26th.
Tier 7 Turret Bug
Instead of having an additive bonus of 25% for each turret, we have discovered a bug in which the group bonus of Tier 7 turrets is being calculated multiplicatively. This is causing a wider than intended swing in the power of base defense by granting a 600% bonus to a full set of turrets, rather than the intended 200%.
In the 8.26 update we are correcting this calculation to be additive, to match the description of turrets. This will give a total of 200% bonus with a full set of 8 turrets. While we do not have a problem with powerful base designs, the intention was never to be able to create an unbeatable base.
Accuracy Bug
The team has recently discovered a bug in which any weapons or counter measures equipped to a ship have an unintended 100% bonus to accuracy. This has made counter measures that are equipped to defender hulls much more effective than intended. This bug is being corrected in 8.26, the week of June 26th.
We are working hard to bring PVP back into balance. We don’t have a problem with players being able to create difficult bases to defeat, but through these bugs it was possible to create an unbeatable base with little effort. Our goal is to maintain a competitive balance between attackers and defenders, and these corrections are the first steps towards getting there
TL;DR
Fixing T7 Turret group bonus to match the 200% bonus on the blueprint
Fixing accuracy bug that is making Defender hulls much more effective with countermeasures
When are Kixeye going to stop messing with the game trying to fix this and then fix that just get it right before you put it in the game?
This could make sense... if they showed us the rest of the picture. Its been teased, but we really don't know what is coming or when. The change doesn't happen until 6/26 (yes, on the eve of bounty) BUT what if they drop something into the raid next week - something like a couple Super Pholgistan turrets, that does about a mil in radioactive damage. This is the strategy they've been teasing, but have taken forever to get to. Once a third damage is introduced, base hitters will be forced to chose how to equip armor to deal with bases. Right now, basers are 3 MC panels and 2 MC2 panels without exception, leaving ship vulnerable to most anything other than ballistic and penetrative; the third damage type will force strategy and hopefully make things interesting.
Like i said, it really is up to them to save it. I think I see how they are going to do it... but, no base will survive bounty if nothing new is introduced between now and then.
What if, what if, what if not everybody will manage to pick up those Super Phologistan turret, considering how bad was last raid.... Theyare gonna put em in locked store and tag 60mil points for worthless hull to open it. Who's gonna pay for this crap
The song that kixeye has plying when they talk about pvp iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiim gonna swiiiiiiiing from the chandelier.
On a more serious note, you guys really need to listen to what we say for the love of all things good listen to us. Spack said it quite clearly that without an armor change in a massive way the proposed 'fixes' would further break the balance issues swinging highly towards turrets being useless, if balance was what this was aiming at you guys have went past it a little. I will give CM Rampage a new turret calculator with the T7 bonus additive so they can see what deflections will be required to beat them.
This is ridiculous. We've spent time & money getting our bases where they can withstand the over-powered conquerors that are around. Doesn't make us immune because a good fleet, well driven can still get in and kill bases. The hitters just need to work at it. The current see-saw between defence & offence is probably the closest to balance it has been in a long time. Tactics & strategy are essential to succeed in both. Now you're adding insult to injury with the thwarted fanbois having to work for it. It seriously needs a rethink, something which kix seem to be incapable of doing along with their pre-release testing and quality control which is practically non-existent. I cannot remember a time when an update fixed problems without introducing new ones.
This is ridiculous. We've spent time & money getting our bases where they can withstand the over-powered conquerors that are around. Doesn't make us immune because a good fleet, well driven can still get in and kill bases. The hitters just need to work at it. The current see-saw between defence & offence is probably the closest to balance it has been in a long time. Tactics & strategy are essential to succeed in both. Now you're adding insult to injury with the thwarted fanbois having to work for it. It seriously needs a rethink, something which kix seem to be incapable of doing along with their pre-release testing and quality control which is practically non-existent. I cannot remember a time when an update fixed problems without introducing new ones.
Not true, you can make the base impossible, mine for example you have to prep guard to get in and you can only do that because i chose not to add all the pen turrets, add them and no chance at all.
CM Major_Rampage only thing you are trying to "balance" is those **** major alliances that don't hit bases because they are afraid to lose their medals
You cannot just cut 50% of the damage off base defence turrets without also changing the deflection values of the base hitting ships!
This is INSANE.
And the countermeasure change is even worse, their ratio of effectiveness even with this alleged bug still requires the defender to use multiple turrets and an equal number of ships to shut down that single weapon type. If you're cutting their effectiveness by a substantial margin, you will totally remove countermeasures as a viable option, and thus utterly destroy the prizes that people have been working hard for in the previous bounty events. You know, in addition to the turrets that you are also destroying that people worked hard for.
If you want to permanantly put the vast majority of people off ever trying to compete in PVP ever again, this update is the way to do it.
And that's even without considering how badly this countermeasure stupidity is going to hit PVE.
"Best of luck, Captains! And may the odds be ever in your favour..."
Raids Boycotted: Hellstrike, Lightning Carrier, Enforcer, Neptune- and at this rate, the entire upcoming Reaver raid series.
First played: Shortly After Revenge Raid 2
It is not legal to bait and switch and that is exactly what we have here. I am also sure my response will be screened and not posted which is why I am videoing every attempt I make to voice my opinion and concerns as a consumer of this company.
Edit: typos
Like i said, it really is up to them to save it. I think I see how they are going to do it... but, no base will survive bounty if nothing new is introduced between now and then.
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiim gonna swiiiiiiiing from the chandelier.
On a more serious note, you guys really need to listen to what we say for the love of all things good listen to us. Spack said it quite clearly that without an armor change in a massive way the proposed 'fixes' would further break the balance issues swinging highly towards turrets being useless, if balance was what this was aiming at you guys have went past it a little. I will give CM Rampage a new turret calculator with the T7 bonus additive so they can see what deflections will be required to beat them.