New Beta Version - September 25th (9-25)

[chicorbeef]

I agree with @pineappledan here. It sounds like it'll be abusable, overkill and kind of tacky if the movement reduction stay at such high numbers, and it really does essentially obsolete ZoC for Boarding Party based navies. 1-2 movement sounds like more than enough for the promotion to be viable. Minelayer could just be something like a "Adjacent enemy naval units lose X HP per turn", like -15 HP or something.

 

[lunker]

I'm more inclined to agree that we need to keep ZOC relevant to naval warfare, but I also hate that ships have so much mobility that they can move out of vision even if you were next to them. It's even more annoying when you don't have movement animations on.

I'd like to see movement debuff mechanics get in, but I imagine anything more than -1 would be to oppressive early game, and anything more than -2 would render ZOC redundant.

 

[TwoPodRay]

I'm more inclined to agree that we need to keep ZOC relevant to naval warfare, but I also hate that ships have so much mobility that they can move out of vision even if you were next to them. It's even more annoying when you don't have movement animations on.

I'd like to see movement debuff mechanics get in, but I imagine anything more than -1 would be to oppressive early game, and anything more than -2 would render ZOC redundant.

It would be nice if you could cause enemy ships to leave an oil slick behind them as they ran away, perhaps because you damaged them enough and now they’re leaking oil.

 

[ElliotS]

Imo tank without cc can't really be called tank, since they have no way of attracting dmg onto themselves.

Zone of Control. Zone of Control is CC.

Jesus I don't know how so many people think that the promotions as is render ZoC redundant.

If you can take a promotion to do what you can ALREADY DO slightly easier, it means that you can ALREADY DO it most of the time. If you can ALREADY ZoC units without the promotion and only use it for dumbed down ZoC then you're WASTING YOUR PROMOTION. It's like opportunity cost doesn't even cross through your minds.

It offers more tactical flexibility in being able to chase down a ship with one ship instead of needing two, and allows you to prevent front-line ships from retreating and repositioning well. That's it's main purpose.

The other thing to consider is that great lighthouse gives +! movement to all your ships. If the promotion maxes out at -1 movement you've got a situation where the great lighthouse has a ton more power than if the promotions stay as-is.

 

[Enginseer]

The other thing to consider is that great lighthouse gives +! movement to all your ships. If the promotion maxes out at -1 movement you've got a situation where the great lighthouse has a ton more power than if the promotions stay as-is.

melee ships.

 

[matlajs]

Speaking of promotions. Would i be too rude to ask, if medic line promotion with its defensive penalty could occure only in a case, that a unit moved? I haven't played a version, when this change appeared and i agree that medic+ march combo w/o any penalty was OP, but this is too harsh. Also with HP above 100, wouldn't be better to change a bonuses with above/under 50 healt into 50%? Now that barage(?) is slightly in disadvantage.

 

[Owlbebach]

It's like opportunity cost doesn't even cross through your minds.

This is what i always think when i'm arguing against everyone else and saying "you all don't understand" which happens pretty frequently i guess. I think understanding opportunity cost is the most important skill in this game

 

[nekokon]

Zone of Control. Zone of Control is CC.

Jesus I don't know how so many people think that the promotions as is render ZoC redundant.

If you can take a promotion to do what you can ALREADY DO slightly easier, it means that you can ALREADY DO it most of the time. If you can ALREADY ZoC units without the promotion and only use it for dumbed down ZoC then you're WASTING YOUR PROMOTION. It's like opportunity cost doesn't even cross through your minds.

It offers more tactical flexibility in being able to chase down a ship with one ship instead of needing two, and allows you to prevent front-line ships from retreating and repositioning well. That's it's main purpose.

The other thing to consider is that great lighthouse gives +! movement to all your ships. If the promotion maxes out at -1 movement you've got a situation where the great lighthouse has a ton more power than if the promotions stay as-is.

I didn't said ML makes ZoC redundant. I said they can be use in compliment to make it easier for tank ship to do their job. It's the same with giving dmg ship more dmg promotion so they can do their job better/easier.
Simple example, a single dreadnought without ML can't block a melee ship with 5mov or more from reaching the ranged ship directly behind, but that same dreadnought can with ML. That means you can have less tanks as your tanks get better at blocking enemies, thus more fire power to spare. Is it worth the promotion ? Yes as hell to me. And no, we're not talking about perfect situation when you can have enough tanks to set a complete blockage, don't bother.

If it's about chasing down single target, you already have BP ship which specialize in both dmg and cc to prevent running away. They have no problem chasing down ranged ships and melee ships without BP (back line or scattering around), and to chase BP ships they can get help from your own ML ship which is already at the front line.

Another reason I op for putting ML onlo tank line is because putting a ML ship without tank promotion to the front would simply make it the 1st target to go down without contributing much; and if you have ML on dmg line, it'd be too powerful at chasing down multiple unprotected ranged ships (if they're within 2 tiles of each other). Unbalanced niches are either prone to exploit, or never get used.

 

[pineappledan]

Designing a promotion cost around balancing an opportunity cost over an inherent property of the unit = bad, lazy design.

 

[Gazebo]

Designing a promotion cost around balancing an opportunity cost over an inherent property of the unit = bad, lazy design.

I don't say this often, but get over yourself and stop attacking me over my alpha testing notes.

Jeez, you're all being very petulant lately. Get a grip.

G

 

[Stalker0]

I don't say this often, but get over yourself and stop attacking me over my alpha testing notes.

Jeez, you're all being very petulant lately. Get a grip.

G

G, it’s an assessment, not an attack. We are debating the idea. As you said it’s in alpha, change it further as you see fit. But if an idea is put out to community, it’s going to get “the treatment”

 

[Gazebo]

G, it’s an assessment, not an attack. We are debating the idea. As you said it’s in alpha, change it further as you see fit. But if an idea is put out to community, it’s going to get “the treatment”

'Lazy, bad' are not assessments, they're diatribes. I'm 100% in favor of critical reception - I wouldn't have mentioned the WIP if I didn't want feedback. But making character judgments based on my testing posts is a bridge too far. You can say you don't like something, but don't accuse the designer of being lazy. That's ridiculous. Talk about biting the hand that makes all of this possible.

G

 

[Kim Dong Un]

G, it’s an assessment, not an attack. We are debating the idea. As you said it’s in alpha, change it further as you see fit. But if an idea is put out to community, it’s going to get “the treatment”

'Lazy, bad' are not assessments, they're diatribes. I'm 100% in favor of critical reception - I wouldn't have mentioned the WIP if I didn't want feedback. But making character judgments based on my testing posts is a bridge too far. You can say you don't like something, but don't accuse the designer of being lazy. That's ridiculous. Talk about biting the hand that makes all of this possible.

G

Yea, although I do agree with what PDan is trying to underline, there's really no reason to get this brash. It's quite frankly not very Canadian of him... Throwing shots like that at the heart and soul of this project is just silly.

 

[pineappledan]

@Gazebo

1. I Didn't say anything about you.
2. I wasn’t talking to you, I was talking to elliotS
3. Saying a design is bad is an assessment, and not a personal attack.
4. You’ve been very protective of elliotS

I think the idea of a debuff placer is sound, and I feel I have been clear that I am not critical of the idea, only the relative strength of the promotion and how transparent combat will be.

• If movement can be lowered too strong, it makes ZOC unimportant.
• If base movement is increased to compensate, you run the risk of ships escaping into fog of war unless a BP ship pins them.

 

[Gazebo]

@Gazebo

1. I Didn't say anything about you.
2. I wasn’t talking to you, I was talking to elliotS
3. Saying a design is bad IS an assessment, and not a personal attack.
4. You’ve been very protective of elliotS

I think the idea of a debuff placer is sound, and I feel I have been clear that I am not critical of the idea, only the relative strength of the promotion and how transparent combat will be.

• If movement can be lowered too strong, it makes ZOC unimportant.
• If base movement is increased to compensate, you run the risk of ships escaping into fog of war unless a BP ship pins them.

Re: @ElliotS, I'm not protective of him,. He can fight his own battles. I don't really care. If you want to chat to him alone tag him or go private. Assume that a statement made in public is for everyone.

Nothing in your statement highlighted that you were talking to him. The 'design' is mine, you saying it is lazy is directed at me. Remember: wide, sweeping generalizations are dangerous.

I understand and hear your concerns. I share them. But there are better methods of discussion than you are currently pursuing.

G

 

[Enrico Swagolo]

@Gazebo
You’ve been very protective of elliotS

ElliotS x Gazebo is OTP confirmed

 

[chicorbeef]

@Gazebo

1. I Didn't say anything about you.
2. I wasn’t talking to you, I was talking to elliotS
3. Saying a design is bad IS an assessment, and not a personal attack.
4. You’ve been very protective of elliotS

I think the idea of a debuff placer is sound, and I feel I have been clear that I am not critical of the idea, only the relative strength of the promotion and how transparent combat will be.

• If movement can be lowered too strong, it makes ZOC unimportant.
• If base movement is increased to compensate, you run the risk of ships escaping into fog of war unless a BP ship pins them.

I agree with your proposal, but man, please just stop with the personal attacks. Saying "You've been very protective of elliotS" feels like a passive-aggressive attack and is frankly not true.

Anyway, let's just stop attacking each other and get on to the issue at hand.

I also would like to see movement reductions, but I don't want to see them to the extent that has been proposed. -5 movement (stacking) is crazy, I am fairly certain that a promotion line that totally shuts down naval movement for the AI is the definition of abusable.

 

[Gazebo]

ElliotS x Gazebo is OTP confirmed

What in the-

Alright, disconnecting my internet today. Possibly forever.

G

 

[matlajs]

Thats diference between mutualism and the second one. No protection here.

 

[nekokon]

Take it easy man, it's Thanksgiving weekend

I think we should just wait until G actually put up the new mechanic, then we can all try out a game and see how it goes. As far I can see, noone really opposed getting this new mechanic, just some different opinions in balancing here and there. After testing it'd be much easier to discuss.