View Full Version : Hacknet - why oh why do you guys still tweak with a sledgehammer
NC2 day 1 - HACKNET was spot on. You had the mob balance right. Now its thoroughly fucked - my HCK 165 hacker gets fucked over by 60/60 mobs?!
Why did you have to change it ??
Put it back and stop fucking things up please.
I totally agree 110% ... Hacknet was running really good the up in till they patched it.. Why couldnt they work on the database issues, so we can download BP's and such? ...
lol
Why did they try to fix something that isnt broken? and work on something that is, like the database.
THE_TICK!!!!
07-10-04, 13:45
maybe in there opinion it was broken ?
I agree on that they tweaked it perhaps too much. But before the tweak, it was too easy. killing 60/60 mobs as a 30/23 spy was not right.
The tweak was too much though, as I keep hearing that even with lvl3 software, those mobs make you lay on your back more often than a HL apu.
I agree on that they tweaked it perhaps too much. But before the tweak, it was too easy. killing 60/60 mobs as a 30/23 spy was not right.Why do you say that? Haven't you ever seen 15/20 chars killing the 50/50 clops at the bunker?
CoDi, you getting butterfingers from all those Kinder Schokolades? ;) ;)
:p
maybe in there opinion it was broken ?
In there opinion, if it works it's broken... If they break it, then it working to them. :lol:
There are so many other problems they could of worked on in hacknet, then what they done so far. The mob couldnt have waited till they gotten the database working at least.
Right now, we can't even hunt in hacknet and we still can't hack in hacknet... So what good is hacknet? :lol:
Bugs Gunny
07-10-04, 13:52
The dammage on the mobs was right. You could kill a lone 60/60 as a low level hacker, but most of the time they all come at you, pushing you off the roads from the impacts.
I could live with a 20-40% tweak, but let's face it the hacknet is a suicide zone now.
They increased the dammage on those things by at least 300%
Maybe someone at KK did a typo with an extra 0 ???? :-)
Going by past evidence it seems that KK use a variant of a mathematical system balance mechanism commonly known as `min-max` as a matter of policy.
i.e. Test a system at one extreme of a variable, then at the other extreme and work toward a balance point more to the middle as results are analysed.
Whether you think this is a sane design choice for an MMORPG is a whole different argument.
Even if you do think it's a good idea the implementation of the whole thing unfortunately falls down because KK usually don't follow the analysis through in a reasonable time frame.
They have a nasty tendency to dump a system in at one extreme of a variable range, then just ... dunno ... acquire Attention Deficit Disorder, go on extended holiday, get addicted to Minesweeper ... whatever - they just wander off and leave it.
The result is that what should be a portion of a pre-release test regimen gets dumped onto retail servers for weeks at a time(in many cases months, and in some instances *never* changed again)
The fun continues when/if they ever get around to addressing the imbalance. Often it seems that no-one has any idea what the underlying mechanism change was in the first place, so rather than tweak it properly and carrefully they bolt on some unfeasibly Heath Robinson layer of complication on top that frequently entirely misses the point or often breaks more than it ever addresses.
Ho hum.
I thought it was perfect earlier... b4 i saw the 100/100 mobs which i should be able to kill with near capped defence/regen but screw that.
And the turrets are MEGA overpowered
NERF HAMMER (dont wing it that hard though)
KRIMINAL99
07-10-04, 14:30
Going by past evidence it seems that KK use a variant of a mathematical system balance mechanism commonly known as `min-max`.
i.e. Test a system at one extreme of a variable, then at the other extreme and work toward a balance point more to the middle as results are analysed.
Whether you think this is a sane design choice for an MMORPG is a whole different argument.
Even if you do think it's a good idea the implementation of the whole thing unfortunately falls down because KK usually don't follow the analysis through in a reasonable time frame.
They have a nasty tendency to dump a system in at one extreme of a variable range, then just ... dunno ... acquire Attention Deficit Disorder, go on extended holiday, get addicted to Minesweeper ... whatever - they just wander off and leave it.
The result is that what should be a portion of a pre-release test regimen gets dumped onto retail servers for weeks at a time(in many cases months, and in some instances *never* changed again)
The fun continues when/if they ever get around to addressing the imbalance. Often it seems that no-one has any idea what the underlying mechanism change was in the first place, so rather than tweak it properly and carrefully they bolt on some unfeasibly Heath Robinson layer of complication on top that frequently entirely misses the point or often breaks more than it ever addresses.
Ho hum.
Jesus christ are you serious? First of all, WHY would there be ANY need to use such a method to test game balance? Its very simple. Mathematical modeling - You take the damage formulas, analyze the situation and figure what would happen in real life and come up with a formula to model it. Hell players could have done it better using this method and they had to estimate the formulas through testing what happens.
IE a player comes in, the mobs have this range, they do this much % damage per second to classes with this defense, at that rate the player will last X seconds, in that time he can close the distance and do X damage (based on his damage/second)...
Its REALLY EASY when you have access to the formulas... If what your saying is true than thats just BLATANT incompetence especially since at the MAX people die and get pissed....
Is this like something you heard about in some video game class or something that people actually use in making single player games?
The dammage on the mobs was right. You could kill a lone 60/60 as a low level hacker, but most of the time they all come at you, pushing you off the roads from the impacts.
I could live with a 20-40% tweak, but let's face it the hacknet is a suicide zone now.
They increased the dammage on those things by at least 300%
Maybe someone at KK did a typo with an extra 0 ???? :-)
I agree... why was there any need for change at all? oO I mean I think they did the turret thing to prevent people from just running by most of the enemy database mobs but why change their damage and range excessively for that...
Btw Does anyone know- do these mobs still attack you if you don't have a weapon ready?
@Glok, because it was too easy. There was no problems taking on multiple targets at once without any fear on dying. Clopses do own 15/20 people if there is 5 shooting/beating simultaneously.
Also, as I said, they tweaked it too much, they went from one end to another, without finding correct balance... yet.
edit: I was going to say something else too, but just read kurais post, that said it all.
stuffO ... K.
I bloody hate replying to your posts, Krim :lol: ... you wander off at tangents all over the fucking place and pick up on the vaguest implications as absolute certainties :D
Here we go then.
Yes, I'm serious - there's enough past evidence to go on that supports the hypothesis.
It's a philosophy, more than a strict process when used in this context. We are talking about human modifiers here, rather than iteration-loop pure machine logic.
i.e. They don't *really* test at infinite $variable then work back - they use human judgement to *choose* a start point that they think is at one end of a range of values that might be acceptable in the end.
The simple mathematical models you refer to would get *very* cumbersome *very* quickly as you introduce more and more variables and ranges of possible values, so it's just not practical.
It's *certainly* not easy.
Don't try to oversimplify what is a very complex system with a great many degrees of freedom and variable interactions - it's an approach that will bite you on the ass in short order.
There are a number of methodologies of going about this sort of work and a sub-set of min-max is only one tool.
What I was really trying to get at was that if they *do* utilise elements of a method that requires several stages then *follow through* with it, or you might as well not have bothered at all.
I tend to work with large, complex systems and networks with a high degree of element interaction and outcome variability, so thinking about the permutations and subtleties of this sort of stuff comes naturally to me.
Please bear in mind that I am trying to communicate tendencies and inclinations rather than pure black or white instances.
Oh - Leave real life out of it, eh. It's got fuck all to do with anything. ;)
Kurai has valid points.
first you can kill it with a stick, then it takes 10 nukes to kill the same mob.
FIX PLEASE, Lets have a little balance.
yea, hack net now realy sux, mobs rn't to hard but when u shoot one they all gang up on u and then u fuckzzored.. and with curent memory leak u start laging and then find er self on then bottom of hack net dead..:eek:
JustIn_Case
07-10-04, 17:35
With the latest patch:
Good things:
----------------
HackNet datacubes can be bought, woot.
Sliding is as good as gone, perfect.
Bad things:
----------------
Mobs do more damage but...
mob RoF, thats the real problem, they shoot like they use miniguns now...
And since you get pushed by the mobs and you sometimes get a black screen even, its no good at all.
Runner transparency is way to high, to hard to spot enemy runners in HackNet.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.