Omega Station Gunnery Server Contraband Addition & Temporary Ultra Kill - #324
Omega Station Gunnery Server Contraband Addition & Temporary Ultra Kill#324Wuffindy wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
github-actions
Bot
added
size/XL
S: Untriaged
YML
No C#
|
No. Put it in a reasonable loot pool at the same time its getting pulled from ships. |
|
Just make the ultra server unanchorable and un able to be anchored |
|
That sounds even worse. |
|
making it nigh unobtainable while you also nerf the hell out of the drone loot pools, increase the gun processing power, and tearing them off ships is a bit overkill |
|
you havent really explained why its bad people have 90 power gunnery servers in the first place. There is no base raiding going on here, and most people can't reliably kill whats out in far reaches 4 on this server. Not a fan. |
|
Have to agree and with that penta-mauler thing showing up in t2-1 to t2-2 space and absolutely wrecking ships with 90 servers, its a bit eh |
|
Preem, maybe we'll see groups of ships joining together and working together instead of everyone running out into the depths solo. Actual fleetplay instead of John Protagonist sat on a ship on their own facing off against the strongest enemies in the sector |
|
And what will you do for those of the characters that aren't part of the bigger cliques, and, as much as you can make rules not to metafriend or metagrudge, its a futile thing to fight against, there will be individuals, or even small groups, that just wont get in on that and will fall behind. This feels forced for the sake of being forced. Sure, its a pve server, in my eyes that's even more reason not to focus on balancing and nerfing what people have without giving them something in return. Sure, there are more guns coming, okay, wait to balance these after you have given other options. otherwise, there's not really a reason to balance the guns when more drones, more POIs like LPB that could be added, more things to go after to cut your teeth on then the same thing being made needlessly harder. |
|
If you want to solo all content there should be like. At least a minor effort of skill involved for that, getting two stock mudskippers together is already enough to trivialize most encounters, if you cannot socialize and cannot ball out, may i ask why you even want to fly out into the hardest challenges in the first place lmao? Ultra-high gunnery servers were never meant to be anchorable. Mono briefly allowed it with a comment on the line of code specifically saying, "wellll, just how bad can it be" and then promptly reverted that change and made them unanchorable again. That level of firepower is meant to be reserved for ships with appropriate downsides to it. 90gp on an light fighter with an big shield is actually just playing with godmode and noclip on. |
this is a pretty big hit to groups like mine who all get on one big ship and take on different roles. I usually fly with a crew of 5 and none of them have any intention of flying their own ship. I would urge y'all to reconsider, because frankly john protag powergamer is not stopped by only having 60 gunnery power instead of 90. This is about aesthetics and fun first and foremost, I can kill any drone in the game with 18 processing power. |
And what about people like me who perfer to have multiple people in one ship working together? Why should we get hit. |
you are assuming that i am talking about myself and making it ad hominem like I'm bad and lacking skill when no, i don't normally go deep enough to encounter maulers, I'm the one who stays within the first two zones and grind the smaller drones in what is the equivalent of a mobile mini station catching stragglers, protecting the inner rings, and as you can see with the comments above, there are those of us that prefer large ships with a crew on the ship, not multiple small ships, which again, has their own whole host of problems., talking multitudes of people that like making their own vessels that are unique to them that cannot have the firepower to match. So how about hop off your high horse trying o find ways of telling people on a rp server subvertly to "get good" and pay attention to the actual concerns that the community has and not your own elitism on a mrp server. |
There simply isn't any multicrew content on monocode, that's an entirely separate issue being addressed but it requires a multitude of systems and content expansions that you are more than welcome to try and help code to fulfil the fantasy, otherwise yeah as it stands there really isn't a point to it, and it doesn't really change much to be down 30gp when the threats are as they are. And for what it's worth, the ultra-high gunnery servers will most likely be made only usable in the way a ship with the capital designation allows them to (making it so the pilot can't access gunnery thus requiring a dedicated gunner(btw this pr should absolutely just make buran and hammerhead capitals instead of taking away their ultra-highs and make ultra-highs unanchorable.))
Talking multitudes of people making the same homogeneous death brick of guns slapped together. As is, that's the crab evolution of every ship, the idea is to break up the pattern by introducing restrictions as the current ones are laughable. And yes, it's an MRP PvP opt in server that will be 99% revolving around PvE, but to make fun PvE, to make actually engaging stories out of PvE encounters, there needs to be real conflict, real stakes and actual fun gameplay. The current loop offers none, this is one step on a long road to get it to a point where rp is actually backed up by mechanics and vice versa. Having everyone live in abundance without fear in ultra-tuned ferrari's makes for a worse rp environment. My complaint isn't get good it's try to think through the reason for something and how it will actually affect you in the grand scheme of things instead of shitting up the github when something inconveniences you. |
|
the autoloader exists, my ship needs 2 people minimum to fire everything continuously since firing, flying, and loading missiles is too much for one person. Multicrew gameplay does exist, even mechanically (ignoring the fact that just having lots of people onboard one ship RPing is better for roleplay then everyone on their own fighter). Additionally I think you can probably do with creating more drones or different pve encounters rather then nerfing players and making existing content harder. That doesn't make the existing content more engaging just because the TTK is higher on a quake. Drones are like math equations, once you know their behavior and how to dodge it doesnt matter if you have 18 proc power or 90. Realistically what this change does is make it harder to have broadside ships whose proc power is split, and mess with weapon loadouts. I understand the plan is to have some down the road PR add ultra servers back in, but until thats actually implemented I feel like we shouldnt bother removing ultras in the mean time. |
|
I think the idea of making them more difficult to obtain, perhaps even making the ones on pre-existing ships have a force anchor isnt a bad idea. However, I do think adding them to ship saving contraband is a bad play. This would break pre-existing ships that people have spent LOTS of time working on/building whilst not really solving and issues. This feels like a change that makes it less fun for players at no real gain. Also, I really dont think the amount of firepower on a ship is what prevents fleet-based play. Fleet based play is generally just difficult to organize (many people busy doing their own thing) and adds difficulties to drone hunting including avoiding friendly fire (annoying when many drones are rammers) and would cause additional drones to spawn due to multiple ships moving around more space in drone territory. It's not so much a "I dont need help" as it is "having another ship makes fighting drones more annoying". Additionally with the changes to drone loot, now you're already getting substantially less profit per drone, so splitting that profit for likely no notable change in amount of kills over time is another barrier for wanting to bring others along. |
|
This, thank you, all of this |
|
Checking code: The only two gunneries that are not saveable are Omega which is only found on the not savable USSP LPC End of research tree ship and the Wyvern AI superheavy vessel. The other gunnery is the station gunnery which is only on stations. Ultra-High Gunneries are not shipsaving contra as it is in this PR. |
|
Both omega and station servers are unanchorable. Making them not save is redundant. About the ultra server. Add the drop chance to drones in the same PR to not needlessly remove content. It is not much effort. |
|
@IrkallaEpsilon apologies, you're right. I got my wires crossed between reading Ultra-High and Omega on this post. My bad! |
|
@PenglePongle you didn't entirely have wires crossed; It was brought up about a server being made unanchorable and IRRC that wasn't the Ultra-high but it was the Omega-high that was made that way. We do get monolith updates, the latest was 3 months ago mind you and its been a long time since i have checked out Mono, but as we do get some of the code updates, the server made unanchorable for a time was long before the latest mono update we got. By that logic, either the person bringing it up in the fist place is mistaking it for the omega ones, or our server intentionally made them unanchorable in the first place. |
|
Probably best to keep Ultra unanchorable not deleting it, so people could still have the dedicated ultra ship. |
the ultra iirc was never unanchorable, only the omega one was And to top that of with the point increase, seeing as some of the ships have multiples, even the ships with high servers will lose a good portion of their preset guns I fail to see why the Ultra high, which only gives a 30 increase is such an issue. I recognize i have presented concerns but no solutions, so here I will offer one. Processing power increase in my eyes, is reasonable if the players are offered a way to counter balance. I say leave the ultra servers the way they are and make a good in-between for the ultra and omega that is only dropped from, say, t2-2 at a rare drop chance making them have to work to keep their death bricks and a high risk reward to get them where they may want to have some sort of backup incase things go wrong. Make it so they too, once made, are unanchorable, and the board itself unsavable so they cannot stock up on them and just sell them. It leaves current ships alone, It offers incentive to go further out, and appeals to those who want a bit more power while also allowing the balance of existing guns. Its a give and take rather then just take. and, if you are worried about small ships having this server, have it be in the ship rules that to have this server the ship has to be larger then x and y size could also likely slap it with a large power draw on the ship, which in turn would combat the power systems feeding the shields |
|
|
yeah, no, omega here is only 200 |
|
i am refer to the ultra being movable part |
Thats not an ultra |
|
the screenshot is for omega, for one, and for two, they also increased the power of the ultra |
where does it say |
|
How about instead of arguing pointless semantics you read my full post and don't sit here and cherry pick to continue a pointless argument, thank you |
DDrakov
left a comment
DDrakov
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Revert the USSP Buran and Hammerhead back to having Ultra Gunnery.
Keep the ship saving contraband for Omega and Station gunnery, admittedly nothing burger but having more than 1 protection is fine.
Set Ultra GCS to be unanchorable, so people can't buy hammerhead/buran (non existing yet will add in future in somewhere) and unanchor their Ultra GCS.
This PR is about removing Ultra GCS from Buran or Hammerhead ship not literally removing Ultra GCS entirely. The Omega and Station Gunnery is just double protection.
I feel like making it unanchorable is gonna cause issues when/iff people want to remodel their ships. |
I will put this here, read it first clearly next time before trying to spread misinformation in the future. |
|
the hold off until at least about a third of what its making room for is cooked and can be deployed with it. Maybe clue the community in on what is coming so it doesn't just look like a giant middle finger. |
|
This pull request has conflicts, please resolve those before we can evaluate the pull request. |
13 participants
About the PR
[DRAFT] the idea was to move the rewards of ultra gunnery server as a rare drop from to drone loots, where you actually have to work for it, instead of simply buy and scrap it off from ships, temporarily putting this in draft while another PR is being made for this alternative
Why / Balance
Ultra gunnery server was too easily obtained and way too accesible, putting them as a rare drone loot would make it so it's something more valuable, but thats for a different pr later
Media
Requirements
How to test
Breaking changes
Changelog
🆑