*** CLOSED BETA UPDATES & DISCUSSION/BUG REPORTS VI ***

Seriously. Put Gorshkov power back to 30. This is total BS!

I will go hunt down stats and give detailed comparisons of why Gen is ridiculously OP atm, yet because I can operate at MAXIMUM potential vs people who have only begun to play and it seems too strong, things get adjusted for that.... So what happens when Sol players, myself included, are not operating at maximum potential without officers (or in the case of new players, lack of skill)... ? Gen ships and available game mechanics lend them a HUGE advantage in the early game + some are still far too strong into the late game while on the other hand, some game mechanics lack scaling ability and usefulness.

You simply cannot balance the game around a BEST POSSIBLE scenario/player on one side vs a regular player on the other.

You must balance Best Possible vs Best Possible.

And I know you like variety, which yes I agree variety is good, but many ships or even entire classes of ships simply do not perform or are not worth the time in the grand scheme of things. I've said it before, and I'm saying it again, they need a redistribution of their budget while retaining their suited purpose for the variant.

Something like the Oslo I and Oslo II (even the III really) should NEVER be used with their worthless 21 engine output. So what if it has decent shields and a few guns, it simply CANNOT afford the power to charge them AND have free power left over to move and use them well enough.

Many other Sol frigates are lacking in hull or offensive power, but the combination of power and speed allowed the Gorshkov to perform. Now lacking in engine power for speed AND unable to charge shields for defense, it is left without a proverbial paddle, up a creek.

 

Let's look at the 'Tanky' frigates on both sides.

Sol:
Oslo I and Oslo II, forget about these low engine pieces of Crap

Oslo III 44 hull, 24 power, 3x 4-charge weapons base 12 damage + 3 range + 3 officer = max 18, 1x 2 charge shield generator (crap)
Overall a pretty slow ship with weak defenses and trash weapons that cost more power to operate than Genari (Gen pay 1 power for first 4 charges, sol pay 1 1 then 2 and 2, so this ship would have to pay a total of SIX more power for the same 3x4 charge weapons that a Gen frigate would, sound fair? no. Especially not when Sol are supposed to be Superior or equal in power-related and shielding technologies)

Gen:
Battalion I 43 hull, 24 power (hmm this model gets 24?), 3x3 charge weapons, base 9 damage +3 range + 6 officer + 6 rally = maximum burst potential of 24 damage in a round, 18 without rally, and a nice 2x 3 charge force field. Now add in the fact that it will cost 9 power to charge these weapons vs the Oslo's 18 power for the same F'ing damage output along with having superior shielding and engines + stronger internal crew value -not that Sol has marines yet- + all weapons are mounted fore and will not require an additional 3 movement points burned to bring them to target.... sound fair? NOPE!!)
Battalion II 43 hull, 24 power (Again? wtf), same 3x3 weapons with same potential, a 2x 5 charge shield! (total output of 10 shield points), along with all the same advantages of lower operating cost, etc, etc.
Battallion III 45 hull, 24 power (hmm ok...), 1x 6 charge beam and 2 x 2 charge beams for a total of 10 + 3 + 6 + 6 = 25 dmg burst, 19 dmg sustained. Ok so this model will cost 2 more power to operate for that damage... at least it isnt DOUBLE the power to operate... a healthy 2x 3 charge shield

Now we get into the serious 'WTF' territory
Battallion IV 43 Hull, 30 power (REALLY!!?), 3x3 charge fore weapons again for the same operating cost and ease of use as above with all the same advantages again and a 2x 3 charge shield.

These battalions all basically have to spend ~9 energy to power weapons, ~3 energy to get 6 shield points on fore (for explosion absorption or w/e), 12 points.... 12 or even 18 free for movement with all the damage it can deal!

The Oslo? Well it has to spend 6 power per 4-charge beam (18 total) and gets a pathetic maximum 2 shield points for 2 power on the front, putting the Oslo III at 4 F'ing free power, which is enough to move forward one tile and maneuver a bit to bring side arcs to fire.

Pardon my French, but 'balance' is not in the fucking dictionary here.... and somehow it was seen necessary to reduce the Gorshkov's engines?? A ship with 33% less hull, equal engines, and significantly higher operating costs... The ONLY Sol frigate that was worth its salt.

I know you need your time to 'feel' things out, but I really haven't steered you wrong with my evaluations yet. Some of the problems that were changed/corrected were not as recommended, and that's ok, but also not my fault when it doesn't work/fit right.

Don't bring price into this. Price is bullshit, all that matters is performance with respect to class level, otherwise it's just a punching bag. After all, an Elbe or a Klondike is relatively cheap, but it's not winning any fights with great speed (or ever vs players).

Sorry V, some hard words had to be said. I REALLY don't want you pushing such imbalance to the first persistent server. Is it going to take me playing Gen and making people cry with what I can do, knowing just how powerful certain things are and how the game really works?

 

PS - Forget the Liverpool Class ships, they are all terrible, with the best Liverpool III that does have sufficient engine power... totally lacking in offense AND toughness.

Gorshkov's used to be respectable and on par for speed/dmg with the Gen's fastest ships, but still have a higher operating cost and much less hull and shields that are only equal at best, hardly making up for its shortcomings.

Many of the other Gen frigates fair quite nicely, especially considering their lower cost of operation due to TOTALLY IMBALANCED LOWER COST POWER CHARGE SCHEME FOR GEN and the fact that they have fore-mounted weapons.

For example, the Firebolt can do 10 + 4 + 4 more with rally using it's 2 missiles for 4 power (14 or 18 dmg/round for 4 power) AND it can spend 6 power on it's beam to deal 5 + 1 + 2 + possibly 2 more with rally for 8 or 10 dmg beam shots for 6 power while Sol get 4 base damage for 6 power and only 1 dmg boost from officer, no rally, maxing out at a possible 5 dmg for 6 power.

So the Firebolt can spend 10 power to do from 22 to 28 damage while the only comparable ship, Sol's Gorshkov, would have to spend 2 power on its missile for 6 damage and then 4 power per 4 beams to deal 6 damage apiece under best possible conditions. 14-18 power to do similar damage to 10 power. Huge problem.

Firebolt may have HAD 4 less engines, but it also had a significantly lower operating cost with cheap missiles, cheap beam charges, and fore-mounted weapons. Now, the Gorshkov has a pathetic 1 power advantage, which translates into a huge loss of 5 power at maximum engineer upgrade as well.... not to mention Power Boost nerf.

So basically, Gen ships are much stronger AND Sol is losing the pseudo advantage of officers (because of escape, but it's not really an advantage if you never die, which a good Gen captain... I... could do).

Gen are prettymuch superior on all fronts at the corvette and frigate classes.... Don't get me started on how Gen can 1-turn kill most Sol corvettes, which is also complete bullshit, and then the Gen ability got buffed while Sol corvettes were nerfed (or at least my favorite one, again because the BEST person using it to maximum potential was too good compared to an average person)

Beyond these classes, the ships start to (START) even out, but Gen ALWAYS has cheaper operating costs due to beam scale (which can really add up at ~6 power per fully charged weapon) and typically has easier to use frontal-only weapons.

Which gets me started on the poor AI.... Fighting Sol AI is probably what made those players rage so hard when I fought them. AI in general is pathetic, but when you pair it with the fact that Sol ships have weapons typically on 3 or 4 arcs... and AI will use 1 of them half-assed at best from long range... While Gen's fore-mounted weapons work fairly well even with the weak AI..


The list really goes on and on.

I challenge anyone to name what Sol really has in it's favor other than Medical Officer Emergency Escape or 3x shield generators on select ships (that are very costly to power). Long range and Accurate weapons don't really account for much when you can almost always move into close range, barring the very slowest ships.

 

Oh, also what's with wrecking the Rank 5 payoff for power boost??

 

BTW, it now takes 2 ranks of maneuvering to see +1 movement point on large ships with ~10 base movement or less. But Evasion is still stupid OP on large ships where it makes no sense for them to be evasive.

 

I know I'm very new, but, these balance concerns seem to leave some very key details out. Like Sol's vastly superior shooting, which you can see in skirmish mode right away. Or there better officers. Those are just two things I see, and I am new. I realize these changes no longer let certain ships (as I have seen) out run the fastest base ships with guns a blazing, and shields up (mind you, fully upgraded from my understanding), but in skirmish mode now testing with SOL is no longer a cake walk to win. I even lost once in skirmish mode, which made me think and go, okay, I need to attack that kind of ship like "this". So I adjusted my attack and won the next time. However, maybe SOL no longer being easy is the issue. I can only imagine how much better they are with even a few upgrades.

Some players will always go with the strongest side, it is just the way of things, but this is a beta and balance changes need to happen. Once there are many more players in, balance changes will occur again. It will have too. It is the way of things since more people can find, and point out broken and unbalanced problems. As an example; I could sit here and scream that it is only fair if "this" ship moves and 60 and here are the reasons why I'm right. My numbers may even sound right at a glance. Yet if 20 other people are saying differently then guess what, I may not be right and have to trust the Devs. I may not like it but it is their call in the end.

Personally I feel this team is doing a hell of a job at making each species have a unique feel without them just copying and pasting from one side to the other, with different skins. Not an easy task! It is clearly a work of love! This industry spends a lot of time behind the scenes, talking, discussing, arguing, fighting, and compromising, that the public never get to see on how to make the game good. How to balance everything, how to make things unique and engaging. Which I am sure will shock some.

I see issues, I find bugs, I point them out, I report them. I hope when they review what I have said they take it into account, but they may not, but they will have reasons for not taking them into account. They know things I do not, and I am okay with that, because they have the whole picture in mind. Not just what I am focused on.

Cheers on the great work and updates.

 

Alright, it is clear you are choosing to ignore my complaints with strong supporting evidence. You will have to wait until the masses (hopefully) of new players get wise enough to see, then you will end up running into the very same situations. Over and over, I keep warning about things only to have them corrected months later after full demonstrations. The difference now is that we will be playing on live/persistent servers where progress and balance and timely updates actually matter, not to mention you shouldn't really be making any major design changes or ship changes for the duration of a server.

 

Yes, you are new and have only played one side vs mostly AI at that, which is a VERY POOR PERSPECTIVE. AI are absolutely garbage at combat, world of difference fighting a player that can actually use a ship to its potential.

I guess you are just going to throw out all the rest of my points because you want to focus on one thing that I did address... I did mention Range/Accuracy of (SOME) Sol weapons. Accuracy means NOTHING if you maneuver in to close range, which is exactly what you should be doing on small ships! Heck, even big ones can! If you weren't fighting something in a skirmish that was using Plasma weapons, then you are just deluding yourself about differences in accuracy and range, which plasmas are rare AND too expensive on low tier ships. Same thing with Amish and his claims of unusual amount of misses... He fires from 2 hex or more way too often. Get to 1 hex and shoot from there consistently for damage dealing shots THEN back off to 2 or 3 hex for a kill to minimize damage. It's that simple. I have a 92% hit rate for a reason, I don't take many pot shots/give away my position. I only fire at point blank in small ship combat, only ever backing off to attempt a kill shot. I know how this game works quite well, I know how to play, and I know and see the balance and how changes will affect the game.

Better officers? Hardly. Different? Yes, some are. Gen Engineer and Helmsman are EXACTLY the same as Sol officers (The officers enabling me to move first and far). The difference is we have medical instead of marine (medical provides little to no combat benefit, purely defensive at that compared to offensive marines, which give great early-game XP) and science (science does have some nice added potential, but you can get most of this on your Tac if you so choose) split from weapons, where Gen has an extremely potent Tactical officer with TWO damage boost ranks and massive potential for accuracy boosts, which will give you pretty damn good 'shooting' too.

Oni... you remember Overload and 1-shot kills? That's something I had been trying to get changed for the duration of this test after the whole risk vs reward dynamic and officer upgrade scheme (Credits and cooldowns) was changed. It didn't take 20 people to see that. It took JUST ME. I kept saying it and saying it along with MANY other similar cases (some were also eventually resolved in one way or another)... but it isn't until enough people realize the fact of the matter that something gets done. Very unfortunate that a shitty balance state will be passed to a live environment when I was able to see what needed to be changed months ago in some cases. Very bad to 'throw the table' and make major changes to game systems during the life of a server, meaning whatever the server starts with, it should see no major updates to balance (only bug fixes). Balance changes should only appear at the start of each new server, otherwise you risk severely crippling someone who just made a choice to spend some long and hard earned XP. That's not the case now with a wipe coming up, but again, I've been through MANY tests and seen the interactions of game systems as a whole + probably have more practical experience from hours played than the rest of the community combined (Amish and devs excluded).

I can see how things play out with the given state of the game, and currently, Gen is heavily favored, not just flavored. It is unfortunate that my warnings are falling by the wayside, though true, simply because people are tired of hearing from me. If that is the case, then I no longer serve a purpose here.

 

Oh I totally forgot to add that Gen ships, in many cases, especially early on at the frigate level, are around 25% chapear than Sol ships (talking about the ones with high performance, Oslo is crap).

Not only do Gen have stronger ships with lower operating costs and typically higher power and hull along with so many other benefits like marine pod XP, they also earn more from Sol ship hits/kills while having to spend less to get their own cheaper ships that are then worth less to Sol for hits/kills as a result of being cheaper.

The deck is stacked against Sol in so many ways, and I've yet to hear what Sol has in it's favor other than what I already pointed out. What happened to Sol being superior by lore? Better engines for the class in order to use their shields to compensate for lack of hull?

Again, speaking from over 6 months' worth of experience (Steam has me at 800 hours) and I've played both sides to victory (Unfortunately I didn't get to record the Gen victory scenario because the server was reset AS I WAS ASSAULTIG SOL HOMEWORLD! But I do have the Sol victory/defeat of Genari Homeworld recorded) against MANY AI and players:

Thank you for your reply, but Sol = Shit outta luck faction.

 

First Honor II is a beast of a ship along with Battalion IV.

Seems to me that there are some errors in hull values of some ships after the 50% blanket boost (Again, something I had done as a result of speaking out against 1-turn kills, not what I wanted, but is a result of my actions), either that or other things were changed and more or less hull was granted as compensation.

For example, the Agile Flier Model I had 10 HP and now has 18 HP after the 50% boost, should be 15. I'm not seeing any other changes to the ship, but admittedly, it is very difficult for me to read the in-game cards as a result of the UI not scaling to my laptop's resolution.

It looks like the AF II went from 14 to 27 hull, expected 21, but possibly received + 6 hull as a result of -3 weapon charges (1 from each of 3 weapons)

 

I have been a beta playtester long before you Xeen. I was the one who pushed for the energy beam power gradient (and increasing the power cost of missiles), which I think has made the game even more tactical than blindly fully charging a weapon each time without consequence. The Sol beam gradient may be more power-intensive than the Genari version, but Genari still has one nonetheless.

But you need to calm down, instead of raging on this board like this. It's not conducive to anything positive here. At some point it has made you a pariah in this game, and your contributions become moot.

Something like the Oslo may be the worst frigate in the game, but its also half the cost of most other frigates. It gives opportunity for a player to move to a frigate early no matter what its weaknesses are. You are of a perspective that Genari is better because of some of the nerfs made to Sol, but you seem to waive the benefits of early tier shields on Sol ships, and very powerful ones on high tier ships. Same goes to plasma beams and missiles, which are dramatically better with accuracy and range (and bonus damage that got raised recently). Leadership, officer recovery, initiative, all are hallmarks of Sol strength as well. Sol defensive structures are all much stronger, and a bunch of shielded Sol tanks working together can put a serious hurt on Genari, especially on attrition warfare. It will be a lot easier to hold a sector as Sol. Just because your personal playstyle is all about up-close/speed hit and run strikes, it is not THE way to play the game for everyone.

And if you want to bring First Honor and Battalion (in comparison to Liverpool and Gorshkov for example) are both high in hull points, but look at their firepower. Quite often they miss, and they have three low level lasers.

 

Yes you have been a tester long before me, and that's great, but what about your activity overall or more importantly, recently? (not to get into a DMC about hours played, just making a point that WHEN you started isn't necessarily the best metric just like the # of players on a faction isn't the best way to tell who has the player advantage) I've barely seen you on.

And I do agree that there should be a gradient to charging weapons. As I've said MANY times though, ALL weapons across all factions should have the same gradient according to weapon type, this is a fair method that also is used as a balance for higher performance weapons:

For example:
Lasers: 1111 2222 3
Heavy Laser/Plasma: 111 222 333
Heavy Plasma: 11 222 333

There is no reason, in-game lore-wise or out, that Gen should have a cheaper beam cost than Sol, 2 power less for a 4 charge weapon (4 for Gen 6 for Sol, 50% more power cost for Sol per weapon, it adds up), both dealing 4 damage and enabling all bonuses just the same at the first point up to an 8-charge Gen beam costing 12 power while the same for Sol costs 17, 5 more power (roughly 42% more power, again adds up on large ships with lots of weapons, possibly amounting to a Gen ship saving 30 power vs a Sol, 30!.... That's 3-8 movement points' worth depending on class)

I've also said MANYYYYY TIMES that DAMAGE BOOST and RANGE BONUSES (per hex, not block tiers) should be a % based benefit JUST LIKE OVERLOAD so that the player must invest energy to get a sizeable return instead of 1st power point = 6 dmg and next 16 power = 6 more damage scenarios....

For example:
Dmg Boost 1 = 25% instead of +1 damage. Player must spend at least 2 power for a base 2 to get +.5 damage rounded up to 3 damage instead of 1, at 6 charges, they can get +2 damage from boost, the investment and the skill make each other worthwhile.
Dmg Boost 2 = 50% instead of +2 damage (Gen only), Player can get +1 damage at 1 charge (+.5 rounded up) or an additional point of damage every other charge.
1 +.5
2 +1
3 +1.5
4 +2
5 +2.5
6 +3
7 +3.5
8 +4
9 +4.5 = 5 bonus damage from boost, a reward that makes the investment worthwhile as well as the size of the weapon and unstacks the bottom-loaded benefits of 1-charge weapon use!

Range damage bonuses scale per weapon type and stats:
Examples:
Laser: +0 to 25% bonus damage from median to minimum range so if it is a median of 6, you get +0 at median or greater, 5% at 5 range, 10% at 4 range, 15% at 3 range, 20% at 2 range, full 25% at point blank and so on for the other categories.
Heavy Laser/Plasma: + 0 to 50% bonus damage from median to minimum range
Heavy Plasma: +0 to 75% from median to minimum range

Again, this is all designed with the concept of rewarding high power investment and unstacking the bottom loaded 1st charge huge damage benefit.


Honestly, you do far better bringing an Elbe into a fight than an Oslo. Better engines, superior shielding, superior repair. Ok it's a good bit less hull and does about half the damage, but your point was to get into the Class 4 range for cheap right??


Granted there are exceptions to every rule, such as you need 1 more point of damage for a lethal attack:

As for missing, well sorry you choose to fight from range in a highly mobile ship, possibly due to over-allocating power (See above why it is so stupid to do more than 1 or 2 power charges on a weapon + factor in charge cost grades and all the other elements I've been bringing into the picture). That's not my problem that someone else doesn't understand the game or knowingly chooses to play in an inferior manner. I have demonstrated a 92% hit rate over the course of this latest playtest as a result my combat choices, NOT my weapons/equipment, which makes accuracy pointless. You don't have to play my way if you have some notion that combat should be a certain way (like Jhaz), so sit there and fight the proverbial shin-kicking contest where the better combination of bigger boots and tougher shins wins, trading hits like an idiot, or fight from range and risk missing (depending on ship/weapons), or do whatever you want. I fight with an adaptive style that is best suited for the ship and scenario of the time, always, and that is typically managing initiative, choosing when to engage without taking pot shots and revealing my location, getting in close for high damage accurate shots, then getting out the next round before your opponent can react.

THAT is what makes me such a capable combatant. Highly responsive application of knowledge and intelligence in a changing environment. Sure I might goof or take a risk or hell, the game goofs me sometimes with double-movement path bugs or 'invalid target' weapon failures for a round. I don't always win, but I also haven't lost a ship C4 or greater once I got to power, beyond Amish's oppression and the game changes. I'm sure that will be a totally different story with lots of players in a map and people actively trying to suppress me. Then there's the disadvantages and nerfs I have to deal with.

Liverpool is weak in the hull, model I and II are weak in the engines with a total damage output of 12 charges + 4 range + 4 officer damage = 20 max for 16 power. 16 power out of a weak 24, leaving 8 for shields and movement compared to what Gen frigs have to spend to achieve greater effect while having a larger engine size.

Yes, the Gorshkov WAS good, as I stated above, the only Sol frigate worth its salt. Now... it's pretty bad. Higher operating cost because of charge grade, higher maneuvering cost because of 4 weapon arcs, weak shielding on most models, weak damage output on one of the models that has a great shield (expected though), and not enough engines to compete with comparable Gen ships, now reduced by 10% to 27 base, greatly affecting max potential with power boost factored in. New Boost is now 25%, so it can reach a max of 34 power with the nerfed 27 engine vs a previous 39 power @ 30% boost while Gen ships can still reach 38 out of previous 39 power (hey look, same exact max potential as Sol... which was fair until you considered operating costs, but nope, Nerf Sol ?).

Again, I thought Sol was supposed to be superior in power and shielding technologies, but that is hardly the case. Most Gen tiers have an equal or greater shield output than many Sol ships with the exception of the few 3x shield generators in some classes. Why the BIGGEST Sol ship has only a 2x shield generator instead of a 3 or even a 4, idk... Possibly there will be variants or other makes of C10 ships at some point.

An outcast, fine. Sue me for caring about the game and speaking up when no one else will or simply doesn't have the capacity to see what's going on yet. Before, I was voicing my observations, but you are correct in that I am borderline enraged at the state of the game with the approaching first live server. If not for that, then it wouldn't be so big of a deal.

If you want me to stop caring, all the man has to do is say so. I'm sure plenty of people would be happy to not have to worry about combating me.

I'm just too hardcore for every game I play I guess... SotA was no different. I had plenty of haters because they thought (Thought... heh) they were 'the shit', and then they fought me. Didn't end well for the supposed 'baddass of the pvp world' when he went up against someone who had been focusing on crafting skills. This is not the first, this is one of MANY games that I've played in where I had varying degrees of connection with development and was directly responsible for changing broken or imbalanced game mechanics/stats and performed WELL above the average player.

To me, it's like I can see a sinking ship and I'm yelling "Hey, you need to come over here to survive", but the person I'm yelling to doesn't listen until their feet get wet. Then it's an 'I told you so' scenario followed by a repeat of the whole ordeal on another topic.

 

By the way, Does the Gen Rally skill have any sort of Captain Level restriction on it?

 

Vesuvius I think has a bleeding heart, and doesn't like seeing players upset, or upset at each other, I don't think he would ban or silence anyone. He wants a 'happy community' of courteous players. But just saying, Xeen, you need to keep your ego in check.

 

This isn't about ego at all

This is a game of war, pvp, conflict, players will get upset at each other, especially if losses are too severe (Basis for my risk vs reward and getting PvP XP increased, players are dangerous to fight, AI is not, so AI did not need an XP boost).

I've primarily presented scenarios, comparisons, and facts, while yes, supporting my evidence with a bit of background about myself as a gamer. I'm appalled that this is what you choose to focus on, a strawman of sorts, and comment nothing about the issues presented or say much on your own, except to attack me here?

It's sad that though my insights are and have been thorough, analytical, and dare I say correct?, people disregard very valid points because they simply do not like the person presenting them. Good grief does that sound familiar.

 

I have to point out that we are seeing an almost complete front of locked tiles as I write this. So again, I say 24 hour lock time is too great and a 12 or 6 would suffice (or possibly as low as 1 hour). Aside from creating a moving, untouchable front, it is more than possible to push from existing territory ALL the way to enemy homeworld and attack in 24 hours once a faction has enough powerful members ready to go, a push without chance for retaliation/defenders cutting off support/line of attack save for possibly reaching around the point of origin if it is accessible and the defense can be beaten, and hopefully not originating from defense platforms or worse, a space station.


I have been attempting to communicate what I believe to be vital changes to mechanics and the balance of the game here on the beta discussion thread as what I say does concern beta, only deviating from that in my responses to others.

If you wish to have this thread specifically for bug reports (though the way the locks can be used as I described would be conidered a flaw, wouldn't it? idk), where should I write about these things? And please exclude 'beta discussion' from the thread title. Just call it 'bug reports'.

 

Hey @eXe There's a chat interface in game if you didn't know, and better yet, we have an official Discord channel too. You could learn a ton if you come chat. I'm currently the Sol leader (unofficially, there is no real leader role, just the most experienced).