Declined Remove twins splash damage

[awesomepeter 33]

What even was the point of twins splash damage?

It was better before.

[Maf 32,328]

Declined

 

We do not accept ideas about removing/reverting updates. Developers explained that Twins got splash damage because it was too powerful against short range turrets, so it was given splash to encourage Twins players to stay at a distance when fighting any enemy. You can, however, remove splash and basically play with "old twins" if you buy the corresponding alteration.

[r_Issimo2 1,495]

I agree, they should remove it, and to compensate they should reduce impact or a little bit of damage.

 

But a larger splash radius would also be good with less damage and less splash damage, same for the alt... less damage.

[Noorullah-K 63]

Declined

 

We do not accept ideas about removing/reverting updates. Developers explained that Twins got splash damage because it was too powerful against short range turrets, so it was given splash to encourage Twins players to stay at a distance when fighting any enemy. You can, however, remove splash and basically play with "old twins" if you buy the corresponding alteration.

How about Twins second slot alterations ?????????

 

 

Every other turret have 2 slots while Twins is the onlyone having only one

[Benefactor 6,889]

What even was the point of twins splash damage?

It was better before.

There is an alteration for it.

 

Old Twins made playing easy, especially for trolling - just ram the opponent and keep firing without penalty. Now, with splash/self-damage, it requires just a tad bit more care and skill to use. If you cannot handle that, you have several other turrets to choose from.

[Tani_S 736]

What even was the point of twins splash damage?

It was better before.

You just stated the point of having splash damage for Twins. It was better and too good before. Its purpose was to nerf it.

[Maf 32,328]

How about Twins second slot alterations ?????????

 

 

Every other turret have 2 slots while Twins is the onlyone having only one

Hazel said that it was done on purpose to prevent players being able to equip both alterations at the same time, as that would be too overpowered.

[wolverine848 13,097]

Declined

 

We do not accept ideas about removing/reverting updates. Developers explained that Twins got splash damage because it was too powerful against short range turrets, so it was given splash to encourage Twins players to stay at a distance when fighting any enemy. You can, however, remove splash and basically play with "old twins" if you buy the corresponding alteration.

Thus making it once-again "too powerful against short range turrets".  :o

 

Admit it - it was a TAX. :D

[Maf 32,328]

Thus making it once-again "too powerful against short range turrets".  :o

 

Admit it - it was a TAX. :D

Oh I admit it. Devs tried to play it off as if the splash damage was actually beneficial, but in reality the range is so weak that 9/10 times it harms you rather than allows you to deal damage to multiple enemies. So it was more like a case of "we're nerfing Twins, but you can get the old OP version back if you pay extra".

[Noorullah-K 63]

Hazel said that it was done on purpose to prevent players being able to equip both alterations at the same time, as that would be too overpowered.

But how about all other weapons, like railgun and hammer and others, theycan equip both alts together .

[gokuMI6 1,290]

But how about all other weapons, like railgun and hammer and others, theycan equip both alts together .

They do not have the reload speed of Twins , the thing is twins is OP 

[Tani_S 736]

But how about all other weapons, like railgun and hammer and others, theycan equip both alts together .

Rail can only equip 2 of its 3 alterations at the same time tho.

[Maf 32,328]

But how about all other weapons, like railgun and hammer and others, theycan equip both alts together .

Hazel said on many occasions that alterations are not meant to make a turret more powerful - they just change its gameplay. So a turret with two alterations should be equally powerful to the same turret with one or no alterations equipped.

 

Although I don't really buy that. I guess that was the original intetion and in case if some turrets it's true (alterations only change the turret slightly, but keep its power the same), but in case of Hammer, Twins and Railgun, alterations undeniably make the turret significantly stronger, despite the disadvantages.

[Tani_S 736]

Although I don't really buy that. I guess that was the original intetion and in case if some turrets it's true (alterations only change the turret slightly, but keep its power the same), but in case of Hammer, Twins and Railgun, alterations undeniably make the turret significantly stronger, despite the disadvantages.

I think so too. But then the question comes up if the original concept should still be followed or if others should be made stronger also. To me it seems more like that in general the intention to balance it is still there, but there are also intended exceptions of stronger alterations and turrets in order to get people to spend and to get some rearrangement in the garages, like we have seen it with Freeze. I'm curious what the upcoming balance changes will bring.

[Maf 32,328]

 but there are also intended exceptions of stronger alterations and turrets in order to get people to spend and to get some rearrangement in the garages, like we have seen it with Freeze.

I'd like to believe that the lack of balance and stronger turrets/alterations are not intentional, but considering the amount of unsuccessful and overdone balance updates, I'm finding it harder and harder to believe.

 

Fine, I get that balance is hard and sometimes you try to buff a weak turret and end up overdoing it and making it OP, but what's so hard about releasing another update next week where you just tweak the parameters slightly to make them, say, 50% of the original buff? Why do we need to endure OP turrets for months/years before they are nerfed again?

[r_Issimo2 1,495]

I'd like to believe that the lack of balance and stronger turrets/alterations are not intentional, but considering the amount of unsuccessful and overdone balance updates, I'm finding it harder and harder to believe.

 

Fine, I get that balance is hard and sometimes you try to buff a weak turret and end up overdoing it and making it OP, but what's so hard about releasing another update next week where you just tweak the parameters slightly to make them, say, 50% of the original buff? Why do we need to endure OP turrets for months/years before they are nerfed again?

To $ell more, to make the rea£ mon€y.

[Tani_S 736]

I'd like to believe that the lack of balance and stronger turrets/alterations are not intentional, but considering the amount of unsuccessful and overdone balance updates, I'm finding it harder and harder to believe.

 

Fine, I get that balance is hard and sometimes you try to buff a weak turret and end up overdoing it and making it OP, but what's so hard about releasing another update next week where you just tweak the parameters slightly to make them, say, 50% of the original buff? Why do we need to endure OP turrets for months/years before they are nerfed again?

Yes, I also think that these changes were not because of balance reasons (at least not the changes of scales this big). If they were made due to better balance, they would have done it in a couple of smaller steps, as they once told us, that they are capable of doing and measuring this.

 

With the intention to balance I was mainly thinking of the alteration concept. There are single alterations that don't follow the concept, but I wouldn't take from it that they want to change the alt. system of compensating pros and cons to a system where there are (nearly) only pros.

 

They waited with balance changes for the implementation of MM and emphasized the module update as a reason for waiting too. Let's see in which direction the upcoming changes will go.