Settings changes

[Micloren]

1. Can we not make every green equal one of three things: brick, thor, rocket?

 

2. Shark sucks.  Make the antiwarp cost normal instead of 150.

 

3. How about rewarding people for good aim and making direct bombs 850 for everything but weasle.  Heck i'd say make it 900.

[Candyman]

 

3. How about rewarding people for good aim and making direct bombs 850 for everything but weasle.  Heck i'd say make it 900.

 

Also lets make bullets 1 shot kill. javelins should only fire multi backwards, limit resolution and lets defend a base with 1 flag instead of 4v4.

[Gruntster]

lol

[Micloren]

 

 

3. How about rewarding people for good aim and making direct bombs 850 for everything but weasle.  Heck i'd say make it 900.

 

Also lets make bullets 1 shot kill. javelins should only fire multi backwards, limit resolution and lets defend a base with 1 flag instead of 4v4.

 

 

I was hoping for serious responses.  

 

Why should the weasel be the only ship rewarded for perfect aim with 1200+ dmg?  Why is it that the total shrap damage that can be done by one bomb is 1520 yet a direct hit is only 800?  You're better off not to landing a direct and getting someone to hit a few shrap than you are having precision aim.

 

We've all seen people complain about crazy deaths because somehow they were hit by a bomb at 1300 energy and smacked by 4 shrapnel.  Why should random shrapnel almost do the same damage (190) that an aimed bullet (212) does?

 

So the way i see it:

 

1. Increase direct bomb damage.  However, i assume this can't be done for specific ships?

2. Lower shrap damage.

3. Lower maximum shrap to 4.

Edited September 5, 2014 by Micloren

[Bargeld]

random shrapnel 

*drooool*

[Fresh New Beats]

sorry - I drafted up a longer response and lost it because tab->backspace. 

 

I'm going to use your comments about shrapnel and twist them into something bigger - about balancing gameplay - because I have an axe to grind. 

 

Shrap isn't random - it does fixed damage and flies at a fixed angle. The pseudo-random elements that might lead to the scenario you're talking about are 1) repels and 2) shrap bouncing off tiles because the bomb exploded at a fortuitous point on the map. Should we remove repels and tiles, then? 

 

Your general argument looks like one that's been made many times before: remove randomness to reward skilled play. That's a gameplay balance question - do you reward skill exclusively, or do you preserve some element of randomness in order to keep less-dedicated players rewarded and invested? How long do you think a skill-based game like poker would last if you took all the randomness out of it, and the superior players won every time?  

 

4v4 has always been the top-of-the-heap skill arena, and people have used that status to argue in favor of taking all the random out. That might have been fine when there were other SVS or pseudo-SVS arenas to serve as incubators for those who are dedicated - but 4v4 is more or less all that's left.

 

Look at all the ways the deck is already stacked in favor of the hard-core players:

1. the arena format itself is stacked in favor of skill - winning cap stays in, winning cap can decide who to play with (.ban), and who to play against (.forcecap). losing players sit. 
2. the 4v4 format is stacked in favor of skill - the 3 life limit means inferior players get targeted, straight up.
3. the gameplay is stacked in favor of skill - most random elements are long gone from the game (bullets, shrap), and others are nerfed (green rewards are random, but don't have much impact on play)

I'm not saying these are bad things. Hell, I think most would argue that the reason 4v4 has lasted this long is that it is a skill game. But we all know we aren't getting new players to replace the ones who drift away, and that's mostly because what you're arguing for comes at a cost, and the cost is borne by those players who don't have 50 hours a week to get good. 

 

ETA: As others have pointed out, the prac arenas are dominated (especially on weeknights) by the same 10-15 people, day in, day out. That's great for them - they get to play - but is it good for the game itself, or anybody who doesn't have either 50 hours a week or a pre-existing group of pilots to play with? 

Edited September 5, 2014 by Fresh New Beats

[Bargeld]

Says the guy on his 2nd post.

[Fresh New Beats]

Says the guy on his 2nd post.

 

IF YOU HAVE LESS THAN 660 POSTS, YOU'RE OBVIOUSLY STUPID AND NO ONE SHOULD LISTEN TO YOU. 

 

ALSO, IF YOU CAN'T WIN 4V4 PRACTICES AGAINST 4 GUYS WHO PRACTICE 50 HOURS A WEEK, YOU'RE STUPID, AND NO ONE SHOULD LISTEN TO YOU.

[7th Saga]

Says the guy on his 2nd post.

Says the guy who is a pub scrub who can't even have a + rating nor anything close to a 1-1 k/d ratio

http://www.svssubspace.com/?page=Pilot&id=Bargeld

[Bargeld]

 

Says the guy on his 2nd post.

Says the guy who is a pub scrub who can't even have a + rating nor anything close to a 1-1 k/d ratio

http://www.svssubspace.com/?page=Pilot&id=Bargeld

 

Says the guy with 2 games under his belt for current reset. -24 and +1, well done.

http://svssubspace.com/?page=Pilot&year=2008&month=0&&id=7th

[Street]

7th, you haven't even played in 10 consecutive finals, take a seat.

[Marioman]

Takes effort to dodge shrap so I strongly disagree with changing it. Everyone has time to see that a bomb is going to impact and they should have a sense of where it'll explode, so it's possible to control your ship to avoid hitting the shrap that comes out in the 8 directions. Maybe not every time, but it's something that would be considered skillful to do (lets not reduce the skill ceiling in this game, or lower the skill floor). I don't want to simplify the game by making shrap something people are ok with flying into, I like that they do a significant amount of damage.

With respect to comparing emps and bombs, I'm curious to know what the exact numbers are for a direct's emp time and by extension the amount of energy you don't get recharged cause of that. Too lazy to figure it out but I would wait before saying anything more. And about the direct doing less than an indirect with shrap, that's very circumstantial (are they in a small space vs out in the open?).

[Marioman]

Other points: yes shark does suck, but it will still suck even if u change the aw cost. Not entirely clear what you suggested with greens... you *want* every one to be one of those 3 right? Well i'm not sure if it's possible but that's sounds like something worth trying.

[7th Saga]

7th, you haven't even played in 10 consecutive finals, take a seat.

Sorry, I couldn't do 10 in a row.  It is like 10 in the last 11 seasons.. I'll do better next time.

 

 

 

 

Says the guy on his 2nd post.

Says the guy who is a pub scrub who can't even have a + rating nor anything close to a 1-1 k/d ratio

http://www.svssubspace.com/?page=Pilot&id=Bargeld

 

Says the guy with 2 games under his belt for current reset. -24 and +1, well done.

http://svssubspace.com/?page=Pilot&year=2008&month=0&&id=7th

 

You are looking at erat? the most flawed stat in the game?   and the reset was not even 6 days ago..   

[7th Saga]

Takes effort to dodge shrap so I strongly disagree with changing it. Everyone has time to see that a bomb is going to impact and they should have a sense of where it'll explode, so it's possible to control your ship to avoid hitting the shrap that comes out in the 8 directions. Maybe not every time, but it's something that would be considered skillful to do (lets not reduce the skill ceiling in this game, or lower the skill floor). I don't want to simplify the game by making shrap something people are ok with flying into, I like that they do a significant amount of damage.

 

With respect to comparing emps and bombs, I'm curious to know what the exact numbers are for a direct's emp time and by extension the amount of energy you don't get recharged cause of that. Too lazy to figure it out but I would wait before saying anything more. And about the direct doing less than an indirect with shrap, that's very circumstantial (are they in a small space vs out in the open?).

All the ships setting stuff and bomb dmg and emp dmg + time recharge etc..  is here

http://www.subspace.co/topic/26024-4v4-ship-settings/

[Micloren]

Takes effort to dodge shrap so I strongly disagree with changing it. Everyone has time to see that a bomb is going to impact and they should have a sense of where it'll explode, so it's possible to control your ship to avoid hitting the shrap that comes out in the 8 directions. Maybe not every time, but it's something that would be considered skillful to do (lets not reduce the skill ceiling in this game, or lower the skill floor). I don't want to simplify the game by making shrap something people are ok with flying into, I like that they do a significant amount of damage.

 

With respect to comparing emps and bombs, I'm curious to know what the exact numbers are for a direct's emp time and by extension the amount of energy you don't get recharged cause of that. Too lazy to figure it out but I would wait before saying anything more. And about the direct doing less than an indirect with shrap, that's very circumstantial (are they in a small space vs out in the open?).

 

Direct EMP does about 1200 total dmg because of the 4 second recharge delay.

[Micloren]

Other points: yes shark does suck, but it will still suck even if u change the aw cost. Not entirely clear what you suggested with greens... you *want* every one to be one of those 3 right? Well i'm not sure if it's possible but that's sounds like something worth trying.

 

Shark only sucks MAJORLY because of the anti warp cost.  You can't purposely fly it and run anti.  Even worse is if you are down to 1v1 and having to run anti.

 

Yes on the greens.

[Micloren]

I still disagree with everyone on the shrapnel.  Why should i be rewarded for missing someone rather than a perfectly placed bomb?

 

You aim a bomb, you aim bullets, you don't aim shrapnel it's fixed.  Personally i think its damage should be either A) reduced to 100, or have the number of shrap reduced to 4/5.

[Street]

 

7th, you haven't even played in 10 consecutive finals, take a seat.

Sorry, I couldn't do 10 in a row.  It is like 10 in the last 11 seasons.. I'll do better next time.

 

Damn right you will.

[7th Saga]

I still disagree with everyone on the shrapnel.  Why should i be rewarded for missing someone rather than a perfectly placed bomb?

 

You aim a bomb, you aim bullets, you don't aim shrapnel it's fixed.  Personally i think its damage should be either A) reduced to 100, or have the number of shrap reduced to 4/5.

Obviously, you aren't missing someone because the bomb explodes.  If you ever watch pros skim bombs so they do very little damage and the shrap doesnt hit them because it is predictable. The only situation where shrap become unpredictable is when you are in a tight space or are rep killed.  These two areas add a bit more inconsistancy which, I believe, gives the game more character. Shrap add another level of difficulty for dodging.  Just get better at predicting shrap (they are pretty obvious) and then dodge. 

[Micloren]

 

I still disagree with everyone on the shrapnel.  Why should i be rewarded for missing someone rather than a perfectly placed bomb?

 

You aim a bomb, you aim bullets, you don't aim shrapnel it's fixed.  Personally i think its damage should be either A) reduced to 100, or have the number of shrap reduced to 4/5.

Obviously, you aren't missing someone because the bomb explodes.  If you ever watch pros skim bombs so they do very little damage and the shrap doesnt hit them because it is predictable. The only situation where shrap become unpredictable is when you are in a tight space or are rep killed.  These two areas add a bit more inconsistancy which, I believe, gives the game more character. Shrap add another level of difficulty for dodging.  Just get better at predicting shrap (they are pretty obvious) and then dodge. 

 

 

Any decent player can skim bombs that's not what im talking about.  I'm talking about the complete random BS stuff that screws a prac/game.

 

Just today i shot 1 bomb across my screen towards Crescendo.  He said he skimmed the bomb but ran into a few shrap that caused over 800 damage.  He was LL and died.  The irony is if i had hit him with a direct he would of lived.

 

Explain to me the logic behind how it's a better game when i shoot a shit shot and kill someone... yet a perfect shot would allow them to live?

[Marioman]

But like I said before McLaren, a perfect shot does do more damage than an indirect. In that situation, that shrap that KO'd me barely hit the edge of my ship, it's not like that always happens everytime you shoot a shit shot. I like numbers so i'd say the ideal way of settling this would be to have a chart of avg. damage dealt vs bomb explode distance over 1000 4v4 games. It would probably be monotonically decreasing (which means 0 distance would have the highest average damage, and as the explode distance gets further away the damage would never increase).

 

avg damage (including damage from shrap)

|*

| *

|  *

|   *

|     *

|____* - . ._ distance

my guess!

Edited September 7, 2014 by Marioman

[Bargeld]

Just today i shot 1 bomb across my screen towards Crescendo.  He said he skimmed the bomb but ran into a few shrap that caused over 800 damage.  He was LL and died.  The irony is if i had hit him with a direct he would of lived.

 

Explain to me the logic behind how it's a better game when i shoot a shit shot and kill someone... yet a perfect shot would allow them to live?

 

 

The perfect shot is the one that causes the most damage in any given situation. If your target is in a corner, don't hit em directly. Hit the wall where you know they will take 70% bomb damage and get hit by 3 shrap for 600 damage. 

 

Cres, when your graph shows "avg damage including shrap" that's somewhat debatable as to what it means. If you are comparing a direct vs an indirect with inactive or missed shrap vs an indirect with a shrap hit, vs and indirect with multiple shrap hits (over time), I don't think that graph would be a smooth curve as suggested. Assuming the situations I just stated, from left to right, It's more like:

 

|     *

|*   *

|  *

|   * 

|______

 

It's all situational, if someone gets stuck in a box and the incoming bomb proxes on the target, then you get 8 shrap inside the box + the indirect damage (this is the worst/best case scenario). Assuming it all hits, you get like 600 + 1600 damage.

If they are stuck in the box and bomb explodes on the inner wall, you only get 5 shrap and maybe some indirect bomb damage. Say 300 + 1000 damage.

If you direct hit them in the box, they take full direct damage, but no shrap. Its 850ish.

If they aren't in a box, at best, 1 shrap can be a reliable hit on an indirect, so the reliable damage is going to be 5 or 600 + 200.

Direct hit outside the box is going to be the same 850 as in a box.

 

Really what it comes down to is that shrap is powerful, plentiful, and offers an element of controllable randomness based on the skill of the shooter and target. Smart targets get the f' out of that corner, duh. Smart shooters aim to make more shrap in a corner. Smart targets skim the bomb out in the open on an angle that shrap doesn't project into. I would go so far as to say the discussion of skill vs randomness boils down to shrap vs no shrap at all.

 

I know this is 'skilled 4v4 league play', but just to toss it out there, original SVS settings had random damage on bullet and shrap damage (yes the actual damage of each shrap and bullet hit varied up to the max damage setting) and the shrap explosion pattern was random as well, meaning that no matter how skilled you were as a pilot, sometimes you just ate the 650 for the bomb + 5 shrap in your face, and you would die from one bomb at 1700 nrg. Uncommon, but possible. So in league play, when we are discussing taking 650 + 190 + possible additional 'random' shraps that might hit, vs a 'skilled' direct hit for 850, it's seriously into some knit-picking and everything is opinion, there are no facts. Datalog for a year and people will still argue about the numbers that come out.

[7th Saga]

Cres was using the average damage on his little graph, not all the possibilities.  Obviously, if it was all the possibilites the graph would range everywhere, but when you take the average damage it should be a lot smoother curve.  As your sample increases, the sample mean should be close to the real mean.  The outliers (prox damage + a lot of shrap damage) don't occur very often in the whole picture of a game.  It is probably <1% that someone actually gets proxed and then takes 600+ damage due to shrap.  Actually, it is probably more like .01% if you really take every bomb explosion into effect.  There hasn't been any data collected on this (that I know of), but from personal experience this doesn't happen very often to me or to what I've seen.  Thus the conclusion is being a smoother graph because those outliers shouldn't affect the average damage over a larger sample when the high majority of the bombs do do a semi stable damage (lag takes play here as well to add more inconsistancy). 

[Bargeld]

Hence, if the curves match over a large dataset, you might as well remove shrap altogether, right? My point is that the curves and the data don't really matter, and it comes down to the community's opinion of shrap vs no shrap. Leave it alone, tweak it, or remove it. It's a decision based on opinions, not facts and data.