[R#175/6] Test Patch Discussion

[Dropout]

A lasercannon is a horrible weapon to compare damage to. Pretty much all laser weapons does WAY too much damage at the moment. Well rifles and cannons anyways..

[William Antrim]

Lets not get pedantic about it. I clearly meant that TC affects High tech weaponry... the clue is in the title!

The very description of spies in the game doesnt fit well with low tech. It should be possible yes just the same as a melee spy is possible and the low tech spy should have higher damage than the low tech pe absolutely. He has a potential of 20 more dex levels. An extra 100 points to spend. My argument was never that. I made a casual observation that my fire modded Wyatt Earp was ripping off 80-90 points a shot on the Mad Stormbot compared to a cannon doing 2 rounds of 200+.

It doesnt need to get scientific and start speccing ammo mods and resists and all of the other precise stuff to see that there is room for balancing changes. Cmaster is right. Weapon balancing needs to be looked at. I hope that the patch does bring some fixes to the netcode or whatever the problem is with laser weapons and Ray weapons (pistol and rifle at least) to make these more viable once again.

Personally I preferred the old system. Low tech for the pes and reaching into some high tech weapons at top end with high tech being the spies domain. It just seems to fit better. I forget the actual blurb that I read all those years ago but it mentioned something about exotic weaponry being the spies domain.

I would prefer to see it left that way.

I would also like to see the AK converted to a single shot weapon and specced at dex 100 as well but we can all dream can't we.

[Torg]

A lasercannon is a horrible weapon to compare damage to. Pretty much all laser weapons does WAY too much damage at the moment. Well rifles and cannons anyways..

i'm not with you here. i think laser damage output fits well in.

[Dropout]

i'm not with you here. i think laser damage output fits well in.

You think that its a good idea, to be able to 4shot a spy with a Creed (and you are aware how fast it shoots, right?) ?
Or 2-3shot a spy with a HL?
The damage is fine for PvE, yes. but if we didnt have the netcode problems that we do, noone would use anything else than those two weapons.

[Alduin]

Please discus patch T#177 in this thread. The patch notes can be found here.

[CMaster]

You want to work out how much the TC speccing matters?

Find a low tech and a high tech gun of the same level. Get 2 characters, one specs TC, the other not.
Now tell me the damage % on the two guns.

If there's a big discrepancy there, then yes, TC effecting damage matters. However I strongly suspect there isn't. The issue with your friend using the laser cannon is because laser beams are rather OP at the moment more than anything else.

[Kame]

Personally I preferred the old system. Low tech for the pes and reaching into some high tech weapons at top end with high tech being the spies domain. It just seems to fit better. I forget the actual blurb that I read all those years ago but it mentioned something about exotic weaponry being the spies domain.

Judge, exec and slasher PEs used to be viable in 2.0, 2.1.

I disagree with what you say you think PEs should be.

[William Antrim]

Judge, exec and slasher PEs used to be viable in 2.0, 2.1.

I disagree with what you say you think PEs should be.

You just agreed with me in the first sentence and then disagreed in the second. Judge and Slasher yes but imo Executioner should be a spy only weapon. I was a Judge PE all the way through NC1. Slasher at its current level I prefer. The old one was just like the Disruptor of todays NC. OP.

Cmaster the one fatal flaw in your plan is one of the guns I was originally talking about does not have a tech combat requirement on it. The other does. Therefore your point is null and void. I am not talking about how much it affects damage as you would never be able to test this. One of the guns would require tech combat and the other would not and therefore TC would not be an issue.

I would like the changes to reflect that of the change from MST to Focussing. IE affect RoF only.

If TC absolutely has to have an effect on some stat or other within NC then I would rather it affect RoF only please. If guns are balanced via tech level as I have previously asked for and then adjustments made dependent on weapon type then TC can be easily added to the mix as a bonus buff. Rof buffs would essentially be evenly and fairly applied across the board in the most uniform way possible. Yes I understand it makes the weapons more FPS-like but if you balance guns in the simplest way possible you can achieve the level playing field that EVERY single one of us desires.

[CMaster]

Cmaster the one fatal flaw in your plan is one of the guns I was originally talking about does not have a tech combat requirement on it. The other does. Therefore your point is null and void. I am not talking about how much it affects damage as you would never be able to test this. One of the guns would require tech combat and the other would not and therefore TC would not be an issue. .

I thought your whole point was that HT weapons were better than LT because the fact that TC effects damage. So my point was to see what %dmg someone using a hitech setup got on a hitech gun, and someone with a lowtech setup got on a lowtech gun, with the important factor (TL) controlled. And it wouldn't be heard to determine - you just do a "show info" on the gun and see what the damage % is. If there was a big discrepancy in the values, then we could see that TC was

However, it would seem that you are wrong about both TC and Focus. TC is everything except damage, while FCS is everything.

[William Antrim]

If that is a confirmed fact and has made it into the current game mechanics then I concur. Quite happy to admit I learned something new today. I was under the impression that TC was the contributing factor to the huge damage output for TC weapons compared with Low tech. For that I apologize.

However the end point I would like to get to remains the same. Tech Combat weaponry should only offer minor benefits over its low tech counterpart. In my original very un-scientific example one of the guns was a rare weapon, the Wyatt Earp. The other was a non-rare weapon. The discrepancy between the two was huge which led to my original gripe. I would like to see these issues addressed.

[CMaster]

As said, thats a weapon balancing issue - the fact that Damage/time values for weapons are all over the place (with say, semi-auto pistols being much worse than laserbeam cannons), rather than anything to do with skill influence factors (which, seeing as it's pretty easy to get ~130% damage on most weapons, and next to impossible to get past ~155%, wouldn't explain the gap you describe anyway.

(Oh and yes, the damage% is a simple multiplier on the weapon damage)

[Netphreak]

Judge, exec and slasher PEs used to be viable in 2.0, 2.1.

I disagree with what you say you think PEs should be.

Yes a PE could use an exec or a slasher but they had to trade some of the AGL or resist setup to attain the high level of dex, p-c and t-c required. (unless they just drugged for them that is)

Spies could use them much more easily but then they didn't have access to anywhere near the resists/protection a PE could have, so it was fair.

[William Antrim]

Yes a PE could use an exec or a slasher but they had to trade some of the AGL or resist setup to attain the high level of dex, p-c and t-c required. (unless they just drugged for them that is)

Spies could use them much more easily but then they didn't have access to anywhere near the resists/protection a PE could have, so it was fair.

QFT.

I want NC1 back.

[\\Fényx//]

Is the dx 7 removal in preparation of supporting some dx9 shader tech ?

[Mokoi]

Is the dx 7 removal in preparation of supporting some dx9 shader tech ?

You may have noticed the addition of AA already in T#175.
Dx7 accounts for a big chunk of code that not only needs to be tested and maintained for backwards compatibility, but also for anything that is still to come down the road. As for when or what that may be... you know the drill: when its done™