Warp-in Balancing

posted on January 8th, 2010, 5:07 pm

Okay, I'll BUMP it.

Back to the topic.


Would it be more balanced if there was more 'lower stat' vessels making higher stat cruisers less likely to be warped in?

posted on January 8th, 2010, 5:10 pm

If we are talking about % chance here, then I think nebulas should be more common than galaxies and steam runners slightly more likely and ambassadors slightly less. But this is just very limited thoughts on the subject.

posted on January 8th, 2010, 5:12 pm

Excelsior and Steamrunner Class are already more common than the stronger Galaxy & Nebula Class.

posted on January 8th, 2010, 5:27 pm

I got three Galaxies once... It was the highlight of my day 

posted on January 8th, 2010, 5:31 pm

Too bad that's impossible

posted on January 8th, 2010, 5:31 pm

I got three Galaxies once... It was the highlight of my day 

And your modding career...

Dominus, you're too fast sometimes...

posted on January 8th, 2010, 5:32 pm

according to the guide thats not possible, one of the 3 warp in slots has a 0% chance for a galaxy, the 2 others are 11 and 29%

EDIT: Blast i got ninja-ed by two ppl, and all threads are a stage for displaying ninja prowess tyler.

posted on January 8th, 2010, 5:33 pm

And your modding career...

Dominus, you're too fast sometimes...

Yeah, didn't think of that one until after I posted 

posted on January 8th, 2010, 6:00 pm

So this has gone from a thread about Warp-In must be made too costly to be used, to one for you to flex your ninja muscles?

  It's not a thread about making it to costly.  It's about making it cost SOMEthing.

  I wish you guys would read the thread ...



TO DEXTER:

  That really borderlines on being pretty personal, man.  I hope you'll reconsider some of the stuff you've said.  You said I suck at micromanagement.  No I don't .  I'm actually REALLY good at it.  The issue is not micromanagement.
  Coming from a guy who almost ALWAYS plays Feds in multiplayer I ask the question:  WHY do you always play Feds?  Because newer players always do.  They get free ships to replace the ones lost from poor tactics.  That's just the case in most situations.


TO TYLER:

  This is not a thread about the ships in it being too weak or too strong.  I wish you guys would read the thread and think about it instead of having a knee-jerk reaction to something you disagree with.  All the ships are in balance in my opinion, what is out of balance is the notion that the Feds are granted a HUGE chunk of firepower and damage-absorbtion with very little cost.
  If you say that "Oh well SFC is SO EXPENSIVE OMFG YOU'RE WRONG" .... then you don't play multiplayer.  At all.  And Tyler ... You are a gentlemen high in my respect around here, but you don't play Online with us and I don't feel that you really understand what I'm getting at.  The Warp-in pays for it's shipwise the second the first Warp-in arrives.  From there on it's just cake.  In fact if you were to forgo the SFC and build an equal number of sabers/monsoons/engineering what-have-you, I think you'd actually be far WEAKER than the Warp-in.  It's not too expensive, it's too inexpensive NOT to get.


  And THAT is my issue.  Read harder ... 

[quaddmgtech]

posted on January 8th, 2010, 6:16 pm

Last edited by quaddmgtech on January 8th, 2010, 6:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

haha. Wow...

When I need to brighten my day I need look no further than Tyler and Dominus.. I tip my hat to thee... 

EDIT: Also, who said anything about them coming in the same warp-in? 

posted on January 8th, 2010, 6:31 pm

Quaddmgtech

Don't worry Boggz, the point has been made and put across - the rest of the thread won't really spawn much useful debate I think. The best solution seems to make the ability cost some supply, that way you can't just spawn fleets indefinitely  .

posted on January 8th, 2010, 6:33 pm

If it gets a supply cost, it shouldn't be too high. High supply cost is supposed to be one of the Dominions main downsides.

posted on January 8th, 2010, 6:37 pm

If it gets a supply cost, it shouldn't be too high. High supply cost is supposed to be one of the Dominions main downsides.

Indeed, but big enough to make you think about it in later game. Anywhere from 20-50 should do the trick. Seeing as most of the more "special" special abilities cost supplies, and you are having to keep those emergency ships in one piece, a supply cost doesn't seem unreasonable.   B)

EDIT: in fact, these vessels are rarer or older or both and thus would likely need special support anywho

posted on January 8th, 2010, 6:52 pm

what if we all just "Decided" that warp-in is cheating and all agree not to use it 

posted on January 8th, 2010, 7:37 pm

@Dominus

Spawning fleets indefinately isn't a problem - late game the warp in ships aren't as powerful. And the fact one has to rank them up to get more caps their total ship count. If one is truely winning every engagement and is able to keep their ranked up ships - they've already won because they are better.

You'd have to nerf the player, not the feature.


Early game (the original concern) - supply cost won't change this dynamic as supply doesn't come into effect till early-mid game.


Though, granted, I'm no expert, I just don't see it as imbalanced (IMHO). Lots of players end up loosing warp-in ships when they rush, and that's a setback. Heck, I have a harder time dealing with Rhienn rushing than warp-in, and I don't want to nerf that one.