Declined Cut module protections by half

[thesquarerootof2 165]

Problem:

 

My view on modules is that they are supposed to be a rock-paper-scissors thing. Where every module has about the same amount of wearers; thus creating a fair system. All 14 modules are equally used. 

 

And sometimes, if a certain turret is a bit too powerful, they can be a temporary solution while you wait for the devs to re-nerf. Just a little bit though; to make the OP turret more bearable. 

 

But this isn't the case. Just look a bit in the forum posts and it becomes apparent that this isn't true at all. Certain modules are almost always preferred much more than others. And there's a reason for this. 

 

Some turrets are inherently frustrating to get killed by. No one wants to be suddenly pierced by a Railgun as they flee with the enemy's flag. No one wants to be backstabbed and locked down by a Freeze, or killed by stray splash from a Thunder. I USE Railgun and I still find it annoying to get one-shot by a Railgun. Also it's kinda frustrating to be killed by a turret that counters you  :P

 

These turrets are not OP (ok fine some of them are but not thaaaaaat much)

 

The result is that most players will equip modules against these "frustrating" turrets, for the sole reason that they do not like them. So you'll see a lot more Railgun modules than say, Vulcan modules. These turrets then end up facing a perpetual disadvantage. This isn't so much a problem at M2 or below, since protections aren't that great, but above that, where protections range from 35% to 50%, the disadvantage is crippling. Just look at some posts about "nerf (turret name here)". I guarantee you'll see comments along the lines of "Yeah it's kind of OP at the lower ranks but at the higher ranks it's nerfed a lot by modules". I think it says something when modules can turn a powerful turret into a weak one. Now imagine if this was used on a not-OP weapon, just like it is right now. 

 

So modules are basically a broken rock-paper-scissors where the majority chooses rock. 

 

PS you're not ever gonna fix that because it would require changing the mindsets of the entire playerbase. 

 

How to fix:

 

This will probably trigger some of you but please read the whole thing. 

 

My suggestion is that module protections be sliced by half. 25% is still plenty enough shrug off a kind-of-OP turret, and it's certainly enough to make a notable difference. But now players can't just slap on the equivalent of no-cooldown Double Armor and make hell for players who use turrets they don't like/counters them. 

 

And here's the mega-trigger part: PRICES WILL NOT BE CHANGED. Yeah that's right your $9,999,999,999 module will just be a $9,999,999,999 module that's half as powerful. However, I have thought over this carefully and also discussed a bit with wolverine about this, and decided that it's the best course of action. Sure, modules will become overpriced, but it's the same overpriced modules for everybody, so everyone is still on the same boat. It's balanced. 

 

Predicted complaints:

 

"But we need 50% modules to counter the OP turrets!" - No turret, i repeat, NO TURRET, is so OP that it needs the equivalent of a 50% damage nerf. In fact I don't think there's any turrets that even really need a 25% damage nerf. 

 

"But then modules will be so overpriced!" - Please read the second paragraph of "How to fix". 

 

 

I've been thinking about this for a really long time. Please read and consider this carefully. 

 

:)

[Maf 32,333]

Declined

 

I full agree that 50% protections are unnecessary and ruin game balance, but it's far too late to make a change as drastic as this. There are thousands of active players who have multiple 50% modules that they spent a lot of money on, and it will be a massive outrage if the modules were nerfed by 50%. There is a way to do this without actually making players' previously spent money go to waste, but unfortunately no matter how it's done, people will complain that developers are thieves, their money was wasted, game is dying, etc. etc.

[thesquarerootof2 165]

There are thousands of active players who have multiple 50% modules that they spent a lot of money on, and it will be a massive outrage if the modules were nerfed by 50%. 

But the thing is, their crystals won't go to waste! Waste is like if the devs cut both protections and price by half, so now you're paid super high prices for a 50%-turned-25% module, while the next generation of players who buy it after the update will only have to pay half for that same amount of protection.

 

But this idea won't do that! "Pre-nerf" players will still have paid exactly as much for their (now) 25% module as "post-nerf" players will have to pay to get that same 25%. It's true, a given price will only give you a module half as good as before, but it'll still get you exactly as good a module as it will everyone else. No one is being cheated here. 

 

I know it sounds outrageous but if those players would just take some time to think they will see that their complaints are unfounded. 

[thesquarerootof2 165]

but it's far too late to make a change as drastic as this. 

You're right, but...I feel like this needs to be addressed. If I ever become an M3, I want this problem solved before I get there. 

 

It's really late, i agree, but I don't think it's too late to rectify this. 

[Guest]

.There is a way to do this without actually making players' previously spent money go to waste, but unfortunately no matter how it's done, people will complain that developers are thieves, their money was wasted, game is dying, etc. etc.

Just give them back half of the money they spent on modules. 

[nemoetnihil 388]

How about modules just don't have MU's at the M3 level, effectively reducing their protection to 35%? Players could just be refunded the crystals they spent on MU's. 35% seems a reasonable cap to me.

[Maf 32,333]

But the thing is, their crystals won't go to waste! 

They won't, but to them it will look like crystals are wasted and they will still complain without thoroughly studying all the details.  

Just give them back half of the money they spent on modules. 

Refunds break the economy.

[thesquarerootof2 165]

Just give them back half of the money they spent on modules. 

Ironically that's worse than not changing the price. 

[wolverine848 13,097]

How to fix:

 

My suggestion is that module protections be sliced by half. 25% is still plenty enough shrug off a kind-of-OP turret, and it's certainly enough to make a notable difference. But now players can't just slap on the equivalent of no-cooldown Double Armor and make hell for players who use turrets they don't like/counters them. 

 

Since Shaft has an alteration that gives +30% damage, a medium hull using a 25% module would be a complete waste of crystals and a waste of protection slot.

 

My suggestion was to lower max protection to ~ 35% - but - it would need to be a 4-protection template to make up for 1) reduced protection and 2) increasing number of turrets.  3-module system protects less now compared to 3 yrs ago when there were fewer turrets.

[thesquarerootof2 165]

Since Shaft has an alteration that gives +30% damage, a medium hull using a 25% module would be a complete waste of crystals and a waste of protection slot. 

75% of 130% damage is 97.5%. So a 25% module actually more than negates the alteration's damage bonus. 

 

Just saying

[wolverine848 13,097]

75% of 130% damage is 97.5%. So a 25% module actually more than negates the alteration's damage bonus. 

 

Just saying

I can't argue with math.

 

However, I can use some math of my own too ... ;)

 

I have invested a lot of crystals on both my accounts to accumulate and upgrade protection modules. Crystals that might have instead been used to upgrade hulls and turrets even more.  But survivability in a battle is important to me.

 

As an example, I might have 40% protection compared to enemy at 20%.  That is an advantage of 20% in protection.  Perhaps my enemy spent crystals on MU for equipment instead, and has a 10% advantage on both hull and turret.

 

If you cut module protection in half, my advantage is cut in half as well - dropping to 10%.  But my enemy equipment advantage remains the same.

 

Drastically reducing one parameter of the game while leaving other parameters untouched can shift the balances.  I don't see this as reasonable.

[GuidoFawkes 2,361]

this is so stupid.. 25%? what's the point of a light hull using shaft protection then? still gonna die in one shot anyway

[JAGMAN2468 104]

It would be better if they just cut the prices in half...

[thesquarerootof2 165]

Since Shaft has an alteration that gives +30% damage, a medium hull using a 25% module would be a complete waste of crystals and a waste of protection slot. 

 

this is so stupid.. 25%? what's the point of a light hull using shaft protection then? still gonna die in one shot anyway

 

I can't really say anything about this because it seems that this is a difference of what we think modules are for. You seem to think that the purpose of modules are to completely or near-completely nullify the weapons that you do not want to be killed by. I think that the purpose of modules is to give you a small but noticeable advantage against those weapons, and also serve as "temporary" minor nerfs if a weapon happens to be OP. 

 

Ultimately it comes down to what the devs actually intended them for. But I do believe that they were intended for the second use, and that is certainly the role that I would want modules to serve. 

[a7x_Pedro48 13,999]

 If I ever become an M3, I want this problem solved before I get there.

If you become M3, you will be happy to have a module higher than 25% against a Thunder M4, trust me.

[thesquarerootof2 165]

If you become M3, you will be happy to have a module higher than 25% against a Thunder M4, trust me.

That is an issue with Thunder and equipment differences, and modules are not the correct solution to either of those. 

[wolverine848 13,097]

I can't really say anything about this because it seems that this is a difference of what we think modules are for. You seem to think that the purpose of modules are to completely or near-completely nullify the weapons that you do not want to be killed by. I think that the purpose of modules is to give you a small but noticeable advantage against those weapons, and also serve as "temporary" minor nerfs if a weapon happens to be OP. 

 

Ultimately it comes down to what the devs actually intended them for. But I do believe that they were intended for the second use, and that is certainly the role that I would want modules to serve. 

If surviving for > 3 seconds under fire is "completely to near-completely nullifying" ... then sure.

[thesquarerootof2 165]

If surviving for > 3 seconds under fire is "completely to near-completely nullifying" ... then sure.

I'm not sure what weapon this is where a 50% module is needed to survive 3 seconds

[wolverine848 13,097]

I'm not sure what weapon this is where a 50% module is needed to survive 3 seconds

You can't think of any?  <_<

 

How about 3.5 seconds?  Or 4 seconds?

 

The WIKI is your friend.

 

A 25% module will barely extend your life.  And in some cases - not at all.

[thesquarerootof2 165]

You can't think of any?  <_<

 

How about 3.5 seconds?  Or 4 seconds?

 

The WIKI is your friend. 

Without module, you can survive: 

• Firebird - 3-4 seconds
• Freeze - 2-3 seconds (you'll just be frozen  :P) 
• Isida - 2 seconds
• Hammer - 2 if they have spare ammo and 5.5 if they don't (possible insta kill on DD) 
• Twins - 3-4 seconds
• Rico - 4 seconds
• Smoky - 4-5 seconds (rare insta-kill at lower ranks on crit + DD) 
• Striker - 3-4 seconds
• Vulcan - 3-4 seconds
• Thunder - 3 seconds (rare insta-kill on DD) 
• Rail - 5 seconds (possible insta-kill if DD and/or HCA) 
• Magnum - 7 seconds (possible insta-kill) 
• Shaft - ok fine

All according to wiki. This is NO MODULE and LIGHT HULL, and assuming you're in their max damage range. I don't see anything below 2 here except for some weapons with DD (shaft doesn't count because i think it's OP). All instakills except for rail (HCA is negated, DD is not) and shaft are more than nullified by 25% module. I'm too lazy to do the math but I'm pretty sure you don't even need 25% to not get instakilled. 

 

 

How about 3.5 seconds?  Or 4 seconds? 

 

A 25% module will barely extend your life.  And in some cases - not at all.

M0 and M1 must be total chaos then since they dont get 25%+ modules. Hmm. Interesting how this isn't the case though. I wonder why. 

[wolverine848 13,097]

 

 

Without module, you can survive: 

• Firebird - 3-4 seconds
• Freeze - 2-3 seconds (you'll just be frozen  :P) 
• Isida - 2 seconds
• Hammer - 2 if they have spare ammo and 5.5 if they don't (possible insta kill on DD) 
• Twins - 3-4 seconds
• Rico - 4 seconds
• Smoky - 4-5 seconds (rare insta-kill at lower ranks on crit + DD) 
• Striker - 3-4 seconds
• Vulcan - 3-4 seconds
• Thunder - 3 seconds (rare insta-kill on DD) 
• Rail - 5 seconds (possible insta-kill if DD and/or HCA) 
• Magnum - 7 seconds (possible insta-kill) 
• Shaft - ok fine

All according to wiki. This is NO MODULE and LIGHT HULL, and assuming you're in their max damage range. I don't see anything below 2 here except for some weapons with DD (shaft doesn't count because i think it's OP). All instakills except for rail (HCA is negated, DD is not) and shaft are more than nullified by 25% module. I'm too lazy to do the math but I'm pretty sure you don't even need 25% to not get instakilled. 

 

 

 

M0 and M1 must be total chaos then since they dont get 25%+ modules. Hmm. Interesting how this isn't the case though. I wonder why. 

My point was all the weapons you listed above kill so quickly that a 25% module will make almost no difference. Especially if (as is often the case) you are fighting someone with more ranks/upgrades than yourself.  MM does not place you against peers only.

 

M1 modules can be upgraded to 25% right?

 

But I like you completely ignored the post (#11) above.

[GorgoBlesk 831]

M0 and M1 must be total chaos then since they dont get 25%+ modules. Hmm. Interesting how this isn't the case though. I wonder why.

1. M0 and M1 turrets have long reload, slow rotation and low range

2. Low rankers are inaccurate

3. Low rankers often use M1 Titan and Mammoth (they are very cheap)

[GuidoFawkes 2,361]

I can't really say anything about this because it seems that this is a difference of what we think modules are for. You seem to think that the purpose of modules are to completely or near-completely nullify the weapons that you do not want to be killed by. I think that the purpose of modules is to give you a small but noticeable advantage against those weapons, and also serve as "temporary" minor nerfs if a weapon happens to be OP. 

 

Ultimately it comes down to what the devs actually intended them for. But I do believe that they were intended for the second use, and that is certainly the role that I would want modules to serve. 

what completely nullifying... 

 

no shaft module, die in 1 shot

 

so with the module i should at least die in 2 shots

 

if I still die in 1 shot then what's your purpose of a module? to do nothing? 

[thesquarerootof2 165]

if I still die in 1 shot then what's your purpose of a module? to do nothing? 

If you're using a light hull and getting into a fully charged shaft shot you deserve to be one-shot. It's that simple. 

[thesquarerootof2 165]

My point was all the weapons you listed above kill so quickly that a 25% module will make almost no difference. 

Even one second easily makes the difference between life and death. So does making the enemy need just one more shot. 

 

 

Especially if (as is often the case) you are fighting someone with more ranks/upgrades than yourself. 

That is true, yes. But if they have higher equipment then you they deserve to have the advantage... 

 

I don't agree with the way you can be placed in battles with people an entire M level above/below you, but given that this is the case, I think this is the most fair way to have it. 

 

 

M1 modules can be upgraded to 25% right? 

Well yes but I've almost never seen this happen.