Declined Module rebalancing

[FrozenRailgun 1,771]

Hello there, many of you had see this idea many time in the forum, but nobody reply to it.

 

So.... Here are the rebalancing idea one last time:

 

When you are using Ricochet and use M3 Orka for example. You supposed to have 35% of Striker protection. However as a balancing... you will only have 25% of protection.

 

To get full 35% from Striker, you have to use Striker yourself.

 

To offset this, modules' price tag will revert to pre-Drone update. M3 Orka would cost 50k than the 250k and of course unlock rank will be same as now.

 

Maf, I totally aware you will say..

 

"Declined.

 

We don't accept any ideas that revert Tanki to its old version. As well as reducing the equipments' cost."

 

The problem is modules are causing turrets underpowered and annoy the hell of bunch of tankers. In a forum page, I witnessed a Legend complaining when he uses Ricochet,  he felt annoyed when other turrets use M3/M4 Lion module. 

 

Literally, we want to make modules useful, but not making turrets obsolete at the same time.

[Maf 32,326]

Under review

 

I like how you're trying to guilt trip me into approving your idea by saying that you know I'll decline it.  :ph34r:  

 

The prices of modules definitely won't be reduced and you're right that we don't accept such ideas, so you'll have to come up with a different way to offset the protection difference. I like the idea of having to use the turret in order to get full potential from the module, so that part is quite interesting. And I do agree that modules ruin the game balance due to some being more popular than others., although I'm not sure if this is the exact solution we need.

 

We'll see what the others say and then assign you a status.

[loginci 877]

 

 

Under review

 

I like how you're trying to guilt trip me into approving your idea by saying that you know I'll decline it.  :ph34r:  

 

The prices of modules definitely won't be reduced and you're right that we don't accept such ideas, so you'll have to come up with a different way to offset the protection difference. I like the idea of having to use the turret in order to get full potential from the module, so that part is quite interesting. And I do agree that modules ruin the game balance due to some being more popular than others., although I'm not sure if this is the exact solution we need.

 

We'll see what the others say and then assign you a status.

When a turret becomes OP, modules play an important role. But, the fact is that %50 modules are quite unbalanced, this should be reduced. %40 is ideal to get protected by an OP turret without ruining the balance IMO.

[wolverine848 13,097]

So Shaft can one-shot every non-shaft and there will be no defense from Firebird.

 

What about Vulcan self-protection from overheating?

What about turrets that do TWO forms of damage?

 

This would highly benefit turrets that do splash damage - Thunder and Striker, etc.

They get full benefit from module while those they attack do not.

 

And how will players be compensated?

I invest a lot of crystals in Rail protection and now those crystals are wasted?

[AncientFire 1,894]

When a turret becomes OP, modules play an important role. But, the fact is that %50 modules are quite unbalanced, this should be reduced. %40 is ideal to get protected by an OP turret without ruining the balance IMO.

nah then surviving against fully charged up M4 strikers + cyclone would be impossible

[FrozenRailgun 1,771]

So Shaft can one-shot every non-shaft and there will be no defense from Firebird.

 

What about Vulcan self-protection from overheating?

What about turrets that do TWO forms of damage?

 

This would highly benefit turrets that do splash damage - Thunder and Striker, etc.

They get full benefit from module while those they attack do not.

 

And how will players be compensated?

I invest a lot of crystals in Rail protection and now those crystals are wasted?

wolverine, remember I had earlier arguments with you about remove triple modules? You literally convinced me to keep the what we have now.

 

You are right about Vulcan overheating is the exception. In order to have full 50% protection from overheating, the overheating resistance has to deplete. Otherwise, when it does not fully deplete and get attacked by a Firebird, Vulcan will only get 25% of Firebird resistance on both direct and afterburn damage. If overheated and get attacked simultaneously, combine the 2 points that I made.

 

In your profile, you use Viking-Isida the most by the EXP you earnt. When you use that combo with M4 Eagle, you are supposed to reduce Shaft's damage by 50%. Not in this case however. Even M2 Eagle is strong enough to help you survive from fully charged M4 Shaft shot. Although double power will bypass that protection it gave you.

 

I will reply more as soon as I get back online tomorrow in my time zone.

[wolverine848 13,097]

wolverine, remember I had earlier arguments with you about remove triple modules? You literally convinced me to keep the what we have now.

 

You are right about Vulcan overheating is the exception. In order to have full 50% protection from overheating, the overheating resistance has to deplete. Otherwise, when it does not fully deplete and get attacked by a Firebird, Vulcan will only get 25% of Firebird resistance on both direct and afterburn damage. If overheated and get attacked simultaneously, combine the 2 points that I made.

 

In your profile, you use Viking-Isida the most by the EXP you earnt. When you use that combo with M4 Eagle, you are supposed to reduce Shaft's damage by 50%. Not in this case however. Even M2 Eagle is strong enough to help you survive from fully charged M4 Shaft shot. Although double power will bypass that protection it gave you.

 

I will reply more as soon as I get back online tomorrow in my time zone.

In your example long-range turrets will get a bigger benefit. Short range turrets will always be destroyed before they get within range.

Many maps have spawn-points that are within sight of campers spots all the way on other side of map.

You want Ping-Pong added to rotation?  Titan Fire/Ricco/Twins would love that.

 

Plus what about the alts that give incendiary damage?  Or Cryo freezing?  Players could never reduce that adequately.  Seen how much damage smoky incendiary can do without good protection?

 

And don't forget heavy capacitors - +30% would override all but the m3 protections.  That alteration is available at m2.

 

Players use the modules that protect against turrets that annoy them most.  Taking that away would have many people just quit.

[Truthteller 4,204]

You're right about the long range benefit, they'll have benefit from long range and the short range will be too far away to matter

[FrozenRailgun 1,771]

In your example long-range turrets will get a bigger benefit. Short range turrets will always be destroyed before they get within range.

Many maps have spawn-points that are within sight of campers spots all the way on other side of map.

You want Ping-Pong added to rotation?  Titan Fire/Ricco/Twins would love that.

 

Plus what about the alts that give incendiary damage?  Or Cryo freezing?  Players could never reduce that adequately.  Seen how much damage smoky incendiary can do without good protection?

 

And don't forget heavy capacitors - +30% would override all but the m3 protections.  That alteration is available at m2.

 

Players use the modules that protect against turrets that annoy them most.  Taking that away would have many people just quit.

Ok what about Duplet? A M4 light hull using M2 Wolf allow you survive from it.

 

I did not say I want the modules away nor anything but rebalancing its mechanism.

 

You can still use Fox module when using Isida though...

 

And you will get fully compensated.

[wolverine848 13,097]

Ok what about Duplet? A M4 light hull using M2 Wolf allow you survive from it.

 

I did not say I want the modules away nor anything but rebalancing its mechanism.

 

You can still use Fox module when using Isida though...

 

And you will get fully compensated.

Duplet does not do 3000 damage.

 

 

And we both know this is not true...  :D  :lol:

[TheCongoSpider 8,965]

And don't forget heavy capacitors - +30% would override all but the m3 protections.  That alteration is available at m2.

The alteration is available at WO4 so it's actually available at M1. 

[FrozenRailgun 1,771]

Duplet does not do 3000 damage.

 

 

And we both know this is not true...  :D  :lol:

Then how YOU want to get compensated?

[FrozenRailgun 1,771]

nah then surviving against fully charged up M4 strikers + cyclone would be impossible

Dude, even M4 light/medium hull using M4 Orka would NOT stand a chance against M4 Cyclone. Only heavy hulls can stand a chance or two.

[Guest]

Duplet does not do 3000 damage.

 

 

And we both know this is not true...  :D  :lol:

Actually, I've been 2-shotted by Duplet's with my M3 Viking many times. 

[Maf 32,326]

Duplet does not do 3000 damage.

Actually, I've been 2-shotted by Duplet's with my M3 Viking many times. 

 

At M4, each shot deals a maximum of 1050 damage, which is 2100 for two shots and 4200 for two shots on DD.

[wolverine848 13,097]

Then how YOU want to get compensated?

It's a moot question since they don't refund.

 

And you still have not addressed fact this suggestion gives long-range turrets a big advantage since you never start a battle in range of isida or Fire or Freeze, etc.  But you can start many battles in range of Rail & Shaft & Magnum & Smoky, etc - those turrets would be able to do lots of damage immediately.

 

Come back with your suggestion when ping-ping is added and you can't defend yourself against Firebird.

 

Actually, I've been 2-shotted by Duplet's with my M3 Viking many times. 

Well - was that Duplet m4 vs m3 Viking?   Did it have DD and you did not have DA?

 

Of course it's possible under right circumstances - but - all things being equal... 2160 damage (2 x 1080) is < 3000 health...

[FrozenRailgun 1,771]

It's a moot question since they don't refund.

 

And you still have not addressed fact this suggestion gives long-range turrets a big advantage since you never start a battle in range of isida or Fire or Freeze, etc.  But you can start many battles in range of Rail & Shaft & Magnum & Smoky, etc - those turrets would be able to do lots of damage immediately.

Then how would you want to rebalance modules?

[wolverine848 13,097]

Then how would you want to rebalance modules?

Only "re-balancing" I can advocate is having more slots.  4 or 5 slots and lower the %.  Many options for specifics whether each has same amount, or they decline after 1 or 2.. etc.  Overall total should be close to the 150% we have now.

 

Keeping 3 slots and just lowering % of each slot is a non-starter.

[loginci 877]

Only "re-balancing" I can advocate is having more slots.  4 or 5 slots and lower the %.  Many options for specifics whether each has same amount, or they decline after 1 or 2.. etc.  Overall total should be close to the 150% we have now.

 

Keeping 3 slots and just lowering % of each slot is a non-starter.

I agree - %45 %40 %40 %30 %20 would solve the whole problem IMO, figures may vary.

[FrozenRailgun 1,771]

Only "re-balancing" I can advocate is having more slots.  4 or 5 slots and lower the %.  Many options for specifics whether each has same amount, or they decline after 1 or 2.. etc.  Overall total should be close to the 150% we have now.

 

Keeping 3 slots and just lowering % of each slot is a non-starter.

Hm..... not that good. What if a Firebird has 50% of Shaft protection and I decided to counter-punish Firebird?

 

Problem is I can only fit Fox module in the the 2nd slot and that gives 40% of protection. Basically, it would be unfair to the Shaft but fair to the Firebird. 40 VS 50.... 

 

Yes I can fit it on the 1st slot, but what if.... there is another Shaft in the battle and has literally.... equipped Eagle module in the 1st slot that gives 50% of protection? While I equip Eagle in the 2nd slot? Then it's likely that I will lose Shaft duel and that dude wins.

 

This solution you give out literally creates another problem. I want to hear from Maf and others too. Yes loginci, I heard yours and.... not a good idea...

[wolverine848 13,097]

 

Hm..... not that good. What if a Firebird has 50% of Shaft protection and I decided to counter-punish Firebird?

 

Problem is I can only fit Fox module in the the 2nd slot and that gives 40% of protection. Basically, it would be unfair to the Shaft but fair to the Firebird. 40 VS 50.... 

 

Yes I can fit it on the 1st slot, but what if.... there is another Shaft in the battle and has literally.... equipped Eagle module in the 1st slot that gives 50% of protection? While I equip Eagle in the 2nd slot? Then it's likely that I will lose Shaft duel and that dude wins.

 

This solution you give out literally creates another problem. I want to hear from Maf and others too. Yes loginci, I heard yours and.... not a good idea...

 

How is any of that unfair?   YOU get to choose what you want to equip and where.

 

There's not a chance I endorse any scheme that just gives long-distance turrets the advantage.

 

I suggest you just play format battles - cuz that sounds like what you want.  Play Pro-Battles and select large maps and have long-distance duels.

[Maf 32,326]

I agree - %45 %40 %40 %30 %20 would solve the whole problem IMO, figures may vary.

Yup, that's a much better idea than this, IMHO. The whole thing with equipping the same turret to maximise protection from that turret not only seems like a nightmare to balance, but would also be confusing to a lot of players.

 

That idea can be seen here: http://en.tankiforum.com/index.php?showtopic=376958&hl=

And a similar idea can be found here: http://en.tankiforum.com/index.php?showtopic=379023

[FrozenRailgun 1,771]

How is any of that unfair?   YOU get to choose what you want to equip and where.

 

There's not a chance I endorse any scheme that just gives long-distance turrets the advantage.

 

I suggest you just play format battles - cuz that sounds like what you want.  Play Pro-Battles and select large maps and have long-distance duels.

Nope. Unless me having 50% of Firebird protection and that Firebird also have 50% of Shaft protection... that would be real fair battle. 

 

Ya think I do format battle? Nope! Usually only matchmaking.

 

You want to go back to my previous solution that you can only use modules based on what turret you are using? 

[loginci 877]

Yup, that's a much better idea than this, IMHO. The whole thing with equipping the same turret to maximise protection from that turret not only seems like a nightmare to balance, but would also be confusing to a lot of players.

 

That idea can be seen here: http://en.tankiforum.com/index.php?showtopic=376958&hl=

And a similar idea can be found here: http://en.tankiforum.com/index.php?showtopic=379023

But, to do this, we will need some time to change our module in battle, so we need something like ''preparation time'' which shouldn't pass 20 seconds, so it wouldn't affect the Matchmaking bad. 

[Maf 32,326]

But, to do this, we will need some time to change our module in battle, so we need something like ''preparation time'' which shouldn't pass 20 seconds, so it wouldn't affect the Matchmaking bad. 

Yeah, I'd love to have preparation time before every game. And their goal is to make joining battles as fast as possible, they could even make it an optional feature. So by default you are put into a battle right as it starts, but in the settings you can change it so that you are put into a battle 20 seconds before the start. Also would be great if changing equipment during that time didn't start the change cooldown timer.