Don't blame Kix. Blame the players that would drive them corner to corner and running away during battle effectively stopping their bases from EVER being hit.

This is not "Kixeye hates defenders, guard fleets, subs, or fun"

Please understand two things.

1) Most active PvP players both attack AND defend
2) If the Harrower is moving, it can not be detected, shot at, surfaced, or damaged in any way.

Second points first. This was a clear unintended feature. I hope people can see that having something that makes it IMPOSSIBLE to attack a base if ANYONE in the alliance is on and sets 4 waypoints and drives in a circle should not happen. I am all for guarding and defending bases, but when you create an infinite loop that prevent an attempt at even hitting the base something needs to change

On the first point, active PvP players in big alliances were guarding bases with a Harrower meaning it was literally impossible to attack them. I am also sure some were violating the TOS and account sharing so there was a guard on and a player online 24/7. Most PvP players both attack and defend. It is not about attackers vs defenders, we do BOTH and most of us want it to be balanced 50/50 (although of course I would like to win 75% of attacks and 75% of defenses on average the two need to add to 100%). Nobody likes "click the back of the base and win" fleets, just the same as nobody likes "bases that are literally unbeatable by any fleet". 

My suggestion was to make the Harrower only be able to deep dive if the enemy fleet as a defender in it, or only while attacking bases. This would mean it can keep it's originally use (although the impact of both my suggestion and the one Kixeye took are the same: Harrower is a prep ship vs the Overlord NotCarrier and can't be used in an infinite loop that prevents combat). 

If you think a ship that can be driven in a circle and prevents any combat from even starting in an infinite loop is a good thing, you're a lot cause. 

Frank_n_beans said:

Don't blame Kix. Blame the players that would drive them corner to corner and running away during battle effectively stopping their bases from EVER being hit.

easiest solution was to stop harrowers from guarding only, i cant even use my gluts to guard anymore

DerpyTheCow said:

This is not "Kixeye hates defenders, guard fleets, subs, or fun"

Please understand two things.

1) Most active PvP players both attack AND defend
2) If the Harrower is moving, it can not be detected, shot at, surfaced, or damaged in any way.

Second points first. This was a clear unintended feature. I hope people can see that having something that makes it IMPOSSIBLE to attack a base if ANYONE in the alliance is on and sets 4 waypoints and drives in a circle should not happen. I am all for guarding and defending bases, but when you create an infinite loop that prevent an attempt at even hitting the base something needs to change

On the first point, active PvP players in big alliances were guarding bases with a Harrower meaning it was literally impossible to attack them. I am also sure some were violating the TOS and account sharing so there was a guard on and a player online 24/7. Most PvP players both attack and defend. It is not about attackers vs defenders, we do BOTH and most of us want it to be balanced 50/50 (although of course I would like to win 75% of attacks and 75% of defenses on average the two need to add to 100%). Nobody likes "click the back of the base and win" fleets, just the same as nobody likes "bases that are literally unbeatable by any fleet". 

My suggestion was to make the Harrower only be able to deep dive if the enemy fleet as a defender in it, or only while attacking bases. This would mean it can keep it's originally use (although the impact of both my suggestion and the one Kixeye took are the same: Harrower is a prep ship vs the Overlord NotCarrier and can't be used in an infinite loop that prevents combat). 

If you think a ship that can be driven in a circle and prevents any combat from even starting in an infinite loop is a good thing, you're a lot cause. 

i dont think it was uninteded, you cant tell me no one at the office thought this would have been an issue in the first place, heck if i was working there i would have noticed this flaw from day 1 of conception,  but yes that sub never coming up while driven was a terrible idea atleast for the fact that it was able to guard bases, however now they ruined base defence for the rest of us who use other subs in conjuction with our conqs to have 1 line of defence before the initial beating our base would get

CrimsonTampon said:

DerpyTheCow said:

This is not "Kixeye hates defenders, guard fleets, subs, or fun"

Please understand two things.

1) Most active PvP players both attack AND defend
2) If the Harrower is moving, it can not be detected, shot at, surfaced, or damaged in any way.

Second points first. This was a clear unintended feature. I hope people can see that having something that makes it IMPOSSIBLE to attack a base if ANYONE in the alliance is on and sets 4 waypoints and drives in a circle should not happen. I am all for guarding and defending bases, but when you create an infinite loop that prevent an attempt at even hitting the base something needs to change

On the first point, active PvP players in big alliances were guarding bases with a Harrower meaning it was literally impossible to attack them. I am also sure some were violating the TOS and account sharing so there was a guard on and a player online 24/7. Most PvP players both attack and defend. It is not about attackers vs defenders, we do BOTH and most of us want it to be balanced 50/50 (although of course I would like to win 75% of attacks and 75% of defenses on average the two need to add to 100%). Nobody likes "click the back of the base and win" fleets, just the same as nobody likes "bases that are literally unbeatable by any fleet". 

My suggestion was to make the Harrower only be able to deep dive if the enemy fleet as a defender in it, or only while attacking bases. This would mean it can keep it's originally use (although the impact of both my suggestion and the one Kixeye took are the same: Harrower is a prep ship vs the Overlord NotCarrier and can't be used in an infinite loop that prevents combat). 

If you think a ship that can be driven in a circle and prevents any combat from even starting in an infinite loop is a good thing, you're a lot cause. 

i dont think it was uninteded, you cant tell me no one at the office thought this would have been an issue in the first place, heck if i was working there i would have noticed this flaw from day 1 of conception,  but yes that sub never coming up while driven was a terrible idea atleast for the fact that it was able to guard bases, however now they ruined base defence for the rest of us who use other subs in conjuction with our conqs to have 1 line of defence before the initial beating our base would get

I made a suggestion about just changing the harrowers deep dive to act like a ghostcrawler... never surface, but have deep dive stages. All problems fixed with that lil tweak. Guessing the current dev team wasnt around back then tho, so that idea is beyond their scope. Its just easier to cripple the defenders a lil more than to force players to strategize

Every feature has a way to be abused. Look at the medal system. People STILL abuse it. Because there are ALWAYS people that want to find a way to beat the system for their own benefit. There is nothing wrong with using skill in a game to your advantage. But, if you use an exploit to make the game impossible to play for others-well, this is the same as cheating. Look at it from OTHERS point of view other then your own. It's not real life and your life doesn't depend on it. It's a **** game. You don't need to cheat or use an exploit to win. If you do, you should re-evaluate your reason for playing.

KIX Drake said:

I appreciate everyone's feedback here, and to be clear, being able to use subs as guards will not be coming back. We understand this will frustrate players, but it was just overly abused by players that it literally made a key mechanic of the game, PvP, inaccessible. Again, we appreciate the feedback, but this was just too abused to be allowed to continue.

There ya go again...how is using a hull as designed by KIxeye, that does what Kixeye designed it to do become an abuse or exploit? This is just a dodge for the failure of your team to foresee this usage, failure to foresee all the implications of design and failure to accept the responsibility for said design flaw. It would have been much less insulting to the player base to just say we screwed it up in design so it will now be changed...instead you blame the players...abuse...exploitation...you designed it....you put it out...players used it in a way you failed to foresee...your fault, not the players.

CrimsonTampon said:

Nyction said:

CrimsonTampon said:

i dont think it was uninteded, you cant tell me no one at the office thought this would have been an issue in the first place, heck if i was working there i would have noticed this flaw from day 1 of conception,  but yes that sub never coming up while driven was a terrible idea atleast for the fact that it was able to guard bases, however now they ruined base defence for the rest of us who use other subs in conjuction with our conqs to have 1 line of defence before the initial beating our base would get

If you don't mind my asking, what subs are even relevant enough to consider including in base defense (Aside from the Gatekeeper)? Ever since the pve number crunch, nothing is really worth putting in as Abyssal Torps are defender/underwater locked and Piranha IV has essentially no range.

everything doesnt have to be about full on damage, there is also strategy involved when it comes to sub guards and if you read what i typed properly youd notice i was talking about a MIXED OUTSIDE GUARD.... wich is why i said in conjunction with conqs, utility plays a big part in defence outside and inside a base.

That still doesn't answer my question of what's relevant though, I focused on damage yes, but you haven't elaborated on utility. There's zero torps that have utility so that leaves depth charges and the muddle missile, and of those, the cryonic depth only works when things die and the muddle missile can only apply a 10% damage debuff with an aura cap of 2, while most conqs are running tac resist anyways.

this has been a feature of subs ever since subs were in the game. The difference with the old subs was they surfaced so you had to use some skill to time your surfacing to be away from or far enough away that they could not tag you while on the surface.

But driving to prevent the attack always been in the game.

The fun bit for the attacker was guessing where the defender might be heading and trying to time it so you were close enough when they did surface in order to sink them. 

Harrower you basically needed to wait until someone was off-line so hit the thing to sink it, when it just sits on the surface you got a chance. 

The game has moved so much from the early days, what was PvP is now just PvW - one party is always just watching, a spectator only. 

the only true PvP these days is fleet v fleet on the map battle. The rest has just been eroded over time, ships in base don't move under control any more due to cries of your controlling or driving. So defender are made static or if they do move then they move to AI rather than any individuals input. For the attacker it is a pretty safe environment to be in, you know what the AI is going to do, it will chase the first ship it comes into contact with. So either keep running of use it as a decoy so the rest of your fleet pick them off - there is no risk they will turn and attack the other ships in the fleet unless the decoy dies. The defender does not have many options at all to engage.

the game is more like Base attackers v's base designers - it is a huge leap away from the strategy game we once knew. IMHO 

DerpyTheCow said:

This is not "Kixeye hates defenders, guard fleets, subs, or fun"

Please understand two things.

1) Most active PvP players both attack AND defend
2) If the Harrower is moving, it can not be detected, shot at, surfaced, or damaged in any way.

Second points first. This was a clear unintended feature. I hope people can see that having something that makes it IMPOSSIBLE to attack a base if ANYONE in the alliance is on and sets 4 waypoints and drives in a circle should not happen. I am all for guarding and defending bases, but when you create an infinite loop that prevent an attempt at even hitting the base something needs to change

On the first point, active PvP players in big alliances were guarding bases with a Harrower meaning it was literally impossible to attack them. I am also sure some were violating the TOS and account sharing so there was a guard on and a player online 24/7. Most PvP players both attack and defend. It is not about attackers vs defenders, we do BOTH and most of us want it to be balanced 50/50 (although of course I would like to win 75% of attacks and 75% of defenses on average the two need to add to 100%). Nobody likes "click the back of the base and win" fleets, just the same as nobody likes "bases that are literally unbeatable by any fleet". 

My suggestion was to make the Harrower only be able to deep dive if the enemy fleet as a defender in it, or only while attacking bases. This would mean it can keep it's originally use (although the impact of both my suggestion and the one Kixeye took are the same: Harrower is a prep ship vs the Overlord NotCarrier and can't be used in an infinite loop that prevents combat). 

If you think a ship that can be driven in a circle and prevents any combat from even starting in an infinite loop is a good thing, you're a lot cause. 

im going to fix your grammar error since you like to fix mines on discord alot....  

Nyction said:

CrimsonTampon said:

Nyction said:

CrimsonTampon said:

i dont think it was uninteded, you cant tell me no one at the office thought this would have been an issue in the first place, heck if i was working there i would have noticed this flaw from day 1 of conception,  but yes that sub never coming up while driven was a terrible idea atleast for the fact that it was able to guard bases, however now they ruined base defence for the rest of us who use other subs in conjuction with our conqs to have 1 line of defence before the initial beating our base would get

If you don't mind my asking, what subs are even relevant enough to consider including in base defense (Aside from the Gatekeeper)? Ever since the pve number crunch, nothing is really worth putting in as Abyssal Torps are defender/underwater locked and Piranha IV has essentially no range.

everything doesnt have to be about full on damage, there is also strategy involved when it comes to sub guards and if you read what i typed properly youd notice i was talking about a MIXED OUTSIDE GUARD.... wich is why i said in conjunction with conqs, utility plays a big part in defence outside and inside a base.

That still doesn't answer my question of what's relevant though, I focused on damage yes, but you haven't elaborated on utility. There's zero torps that have utility so that leaves depth charges and the muddle missile, and of those, the cryonic depth only works when things die and the muddle missile can only apply a 10% damage debuff with an aura cap of 2, while most conqs are running tac resist anyways.

im not giving you my defence secrets lol

KIX Drake said:

I appreciate everyone's feedback here, and to be clear, being able to use subs as guards will not be coming back. We understand this will frustrate players, but it was just overly abused by players that it literally made a key mechanic of the game, PvP, inaccessible. Again, we appreciate the feedback, but this was just too abused to be allowed to continue.

Boo your killing creativity with every update. The simple solution was to stop subs with deep dive from guarding the base, youve ruined strategy for the rest of us who mixed in some subs with our conqs to help defend. your team needs to start thinking how your ideas will affect certain aspects of the game before hand so you dont mess it up for half or more of the community.

Bin_Chicken said:

god forbid I should try and put words in your mouth, actually just saying its a base hitting game and that players shouldn't worry so much about ways and means to stop getting there base hit being taken off the table, embrace the bubble!!

Those of us who are all about defence do care when certains means of defending our bases gets removed or changed, the harrower while i do agree was a terribly thought out hull and should have been thoroughly tested was not and should not have been allowed to guard bases. However prohibiting other subs that do not " deep dive " if a terrible idea, it takes from the strategy that many of us have come to use to get atleast a slight edge over attackers. I used to use a lurker sub as my flagship and would often times add other hulls to the mix to keep my enemy guessing to wich i would then cover with a megaship to keep my enemies from tagging my outer guard with interceptor fleets wich conquerors and defender were no match against at the time. Most other ships that many players or myself would use as the flagship to the outer guard were too large to hide behind a megaship and would then be hit by the interceptors. Now we are back to square one and attackers have an even bigger advantage than before. All defenders ask is more fairness when it comes to game play wich is dictated as PvP wich really only benefit the attackers most of the time. If they barred all deep dive subs from guarding that would have solved the issue, stopping other subs just castrated a defenders chances at creative defence strategies.