Player Features and Ideas Discussion

But.....complexity is necessary in a game about the endless night of a game about space.

Imagine travelling across the galaxy only to find that they have all the same stuff as you.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

More content, less faffing around with what we already have.


Personally i resent this simplification of our wonderfully complex and compelling game.

QFT.

Don't get me wrong, it's nice to see all the smaller ships being flown more, but a confirmation that the Devs acknowledge the issue and are working it would be nice.

I'm sure they could figure it out if they turned their eye to it.

Justified Rage surrounding the Barbican storyline 800mm PG increase aside, I like the fact that Imperial Navy plates provide more armour, while being more massive compared to Federation Fleet ones, and also the reduced signature penalty on the Thukker SEs.

I like it. A lot.

First, good choice in getting rid of 50mm plates. No one used them and it will make life less confusing for new players who may not realize that they are never the right choice.

Second, I like the idea of tiericide, but these changes seem to be focused purely on reducing options, rather than giving interesting choices. For example, my old logic ran like this:

Meta 0: Don't use
Meta 1: Don't use
Meta 2: Don't use
Meta 3: Use if you can't fit or pay for Meta 4
Meta 4: Use if you can't fit T2
T2: Use if fitting isn't an issue

My new logic pretty much runs like this

Meta 0: Don't use.
Compact: Use if you can't fit restrained
Restrained: Use if you can't fit T2
T2: Use when fitting isn't an issue

As you can see, Meta 1/2 went away, but other than that, there is no change to my logic, except that you eliminated cost as a potential factor in my decision. I would prefer that you keep the same number of modules, but you replace the meta 1/2 modules with interesting choices, like a shield extender that gives fewer hit points, but gives, say an 10% bonus to EM resists, or an armor plate that absorbs a lot of heat from overheated modules, but doesn't take much damage from it, making it an effective heat sink. You could potentially spice up the metagame a lot, and maybe even create situations where T2 doesn't equal strictly better, which I, personally, would find facinating.

Because shield extenders come prenerfed with a penalty to sigRad, which makes the ship take more damage. And unlike armor plates, there is no skill to reduce that penalty.

Seems balanced to me.

The stats sheets have been updated with some changes we will make in light of feedback.

Change Sheets - Updated 22-05-15

Armor Plates Module Tiericide

Shield Extender Module Tiericide

In summary, on reflection the Tech II armor plates have had their HP values maintained as at current TQ numbers; the Storyline plates have been adjusted as a group to have low fitting requirements but with less HP bonus than in the original proposed changes; the Syndicate faction plates have had a significant powergrid requirement cut in order to further differentiate them and hopefully make them an attractive option for some uses.

Minor adjustment to Storyline shield extenders to emphasize the lower fitting aspect of the modules is also included.

Hopefully this addresses the bulk of the concerns. We've listened to all the feedback but don't necessarily agree with all of it. I want to also note that these changes are taking place as part of the module tiericide effort and don't represent the last word in balance of these module groups.

Very nice, though my initial concerns about sig vs HP on shield extenders still stand.

Any plan to make the Federation Navy plates offered through the loyalty point store through the Federation Navy (same for the other respective navys)? It seems odd that we have access to other armor modules, but not the plates.

Those are fair points to make but the main effort in this exercise is the rebalance around the principles we are using to inform module tiericide combined with some of the implications of module tiericide, such as where modules and blueprints are removed.

A more radical approach could be contemplated, for sure, and we briefly chatted about it but it is actually a significant bit of extra design time and effort to decide what of various radical options should be taken and to then design around them.

The great benefit of module tiericide is that it is establishing a more coherent framework that should make big changes easier to contemplate and implement.

Overall, it's a priority call where the allocated time is being focused on a relatively straightforward rebalance and some tidying up rather than on a more radical shift.

It's also I would say useful sometimes to see how changes work out knowing that we have the flexibility to revisit and perhaps do more due to the way we now release features. I would anticipate some revisiting once we've done the basic sweep through modules in the current effort.