Fer de lance and expected python nerf

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

Britannkic

Britannkic
Balancing! The bane of all games.
Real life isn't balanced.
The BMW M5 has been best in class for 30+ years. Sometimes someone manages to create a bleedin great thing that is just better than its peers.

The launch of HMS Dreadnought in the 1900's rendered every single surface fighting ship in every navy in the world obsolete overnight, it was that ahead of its peers. That's real life

Is the Python a large or medium ship? That can only be answered by measuring what volume the ship displaces compared to the definition of large and medium.

Nothing wrong with medium ships packing in large ship components e.g. The pocket-battleship concept or for that matter the Escort Cosworth packing in Sierra Cosworth parts.

In space your manoeuvrability depends on you ratio of mass to power. Heavy ship massive power can equal light ship low power

What is the Python design philosophy? Medium ship with large ship power/thrust/weapon systems? Is that it's original design basis or have FD just introduced it not true to its origins? and are correcting that ?

Python is not a new ship after all so is it possible newer and smaller but more powerful power plants and thrusters occupy the historically larger internal compartments?
 

Durden T.

Durden T.
I am trading toward the Python almost since I started playing the game. I've always wanted a good multi-purpose ship and decided the Python was my first choice.

I am now at +45 millions and earning from 5 to 8 per day, only to find that the ship is going to be nerfed.

This are not good news to people that cannot play the game the whole day like many others seem to do and make progress a lot slowlier. I have now the feeling that am always late to everything in this game.

I really hope devs to think more about giving some price to players that invest the time to gain the credits to buy a Python (which in my case is a loong way) instead of taking features out of the ships that, like it or not, are the motivation of a decent amount of players, no matter the reason behind it.
 
Last edited:

Aleksej

Aleksej
Britannkic said:
Balancing! The bane of all games.
Real life isn't balanced.
The BMW M5 has been best in class for 30+ years. Sometimes someone manages to create a bleedin great thing that is just better than its peers.

The launch of HMS Dreadnought in the 1900's rendered every single surface fighting ship in every navy in the world obsolete overnight, it was that ahead of its peers. That's real life

Is the Python a large or medium ship? That can only be answered by measuring what volume the ship displaces compared to the definition of large and medium.

Nothing wrong with medium ships packing in large ship components e.g. The pocket-battleship concept or for that matter the Escort Cosworth packing in Sierra Cosworth parts.

In space your manoeuvrability depends on you ratio of mass to power. Heavy ship massive power can equal light ship low power

What is the Python design philosophy? Medium ship with large ship power/thrust/weapon systems? Is that it's original design basis or have FD just introduced it not true to its origins? and are correcting that ?

Python is not a new ship after all so is it possible newer and smaller but more powerful power plants and thrusters occupy the historically larger internal compartments?
Click to expand...

The issue is that real life aspects sometimes contradict the goals of the game. And the goal of the game is to keep players playing as long as possible. Creating a ship that would outclass all others would make the game boring as everyone is going to get this ship sooner or later.

Taking into account your example - Dreadnoughts indeed have rendered all other pre-existing ships obsolete. But this also lead to the development of similar ships by other countries. And after sometime Dreadnoughts became obsolete as well. It would demand too many resources to constantly add new ships and render others obsolete. IMO that's the reason for having a difference (balancing) in the games.

According to the devs Python is a large ship, which can land on medium landing pads as it's profile (height) is slim.
 

Yumad

Y
My god I've never seen so many stupid people in one thread. It's still a powerful ship, just 33% less powerful. The fact that they are willing to nerf it by 33% shows out outrageously strong it was. It will STILL wipe the floor with anything granted it's flown by a skilled pilot. If some of you less capable pilots have been using the python as a crutch for your less than stellar playing abilities, well, get good.
 

BigBadB

B
Spiridon said:
Amen to that, brother. "Balancing" is the most idiotic thing in games.
Click to expand...

Britannkic said:
Balancing! The bane of all games.
Click to expand...
I see this kind of sentiment a lot from certain players (the above are just two examples from recent posts in this particular thread).

With respect, all you are doing is displaying a fundamental lack of understanding about games and the basic principles underlying their design and structure, and what makes them fun to play (or not).

I know from experience that explaining why game balance is so important tend to fall on deaf ears. Instead, I have a question for you:

Why, if your views on game balance are correct, do all professional game designers clearly regard game balance as critically important? Why do the people whose job it is to make games (many of whom now have decades of experience) continuously strive to improve the balance in their games, even knowing that any attempt to do so will result in endless screaming from a certain proportion of their players, if not outright abuse?

Do you genuinely believe that the entire games industry is based on a flawed understanding of the form of entertainment that it makes? Are all game designers, including the ones that make this game (which you apparently enjoy) just idiots?

Or is it just possible that the people who spend their careers (and normally an unreasonable proportion of their personal time) making and playing games might just understand something that you're missing?


Real life isn't balanced.
Click to expand...
No, and real life isn't a game.

Games are a form of structured play. It's that very structure that makes them fun, as opposed to real life, which isn't balanced and often isn't a great deal of fun.

Is the Python a large or medium ship? That can only be answered by measuring what volume the ship displaces compared to the definition of large and medium.
Click to expand...
No, it can be answered by asking the devs who made the ship and game in which it features. Who have said that it's treated in all respects other than landing pad size as a large ship.

You might not like the answer, but that doesn't make it incorrect.

What is the Python design philosophy?
Click to expand...
It's a large multi-role ship, similar in basic concept to the Cobra but bigger and more powerful in several respects.
 

metzger

Banned
metzger
Yumad said:
My god I've never seen so many stupid people in one thread. It's still a powerful ship, just 33% less powerful. The fact that they are willing to nerf it by 33% shows out outrageously strong it was. It will STILL wipe the floor with anything granted it's flown by a skilled pilot. If some of you less capable pilots have been using the python as a crutch for your less than stellar playing abilities, well, get good.
Click to expand...
you mad?
 

remosito

R
Dumbfire missiles got a nerf too. Should take care of half the arguments that were brought up against the Python nerf. Vipers/Cobras will have a much harder time now against big prey.

main changes: drastically reduced damage to shields. targetable and thus downable by point defense systems.

Mike Evans said:
So point defence does work against dumbfire missiles now and we're experimenting with the way it fires to improve it's ability to take down missiles. However this won't stop an alpha strike from close range but is still a good thing to fix none the less. In addition to ensure that point defence isn't the de-facto module to fit on all utility mounts we're working on changes that might make the heat sink more useful and new modules that you might want on them instead ;)

I don't think missiles actually need any changes themselves. Instead I proposed and was approved to increase the shields resistance to explosive damage dramatically. Currently kinetic and explosive weapons have the same resistance values. With this change it would take many alpha strikes to drop the shield. The hull however is unaffected by the change and can still be destroyed quickly. What I like about this solution however is that for one it makes the initial volley very inefficient and should provide the target some time to do something about it before it's too late. Secondly it makes more sense to me that a missile must penetrate the hull and then explode to do damage in space where as detonating against a shield results in a flash with not a lot of bang because space is a vacuum.

These aren't perfect solutions by any means but they're a step in the right direction.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:

Yumad

Y
metzger said:
you mad?
Click to expand...

Why does everyone assume that I'm mad? Are you incapable of reading? Do you just read my name with drool coming out of your mouth "huuuuuuuhh,, yooooou mad. huhuhuhuhuh"

Everyone in this thread seems very mad about these changes though, which is amusing.
 

Yumad

Y
Kyokushin said:
Get lost, do not offend others. It is rude.
Click to expand...


https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=102717&page=19&p=1598318&highlight=#post1598318

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=102717&page=17&p=1598065&highlight=#post1598065

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=102717&page=16&p=1597972&highlight=#post1597972

Sometimes it's hard to tell with your questionable grammar. The manner in which you speak reminds me of google translate, but the intent to offend is still present in many of your posts, these are but a few. Don't be a hypocrite.
 

metzger

Banned
metzger
BigBadB said:
With respect, all you are doing is displaying a fundamental lack of understanding about games and the basic principles underlying their design and structure, and what makes them fun to play (or not).
Click to expand...
No one is suggesting that the game should be a mess, but the danger here is that the ships will lack variety. The post-nerf Python looks more like a generic trading vessel, just a stepping stone to the T9.
 

Ian Skippy

Ian Skippy
Britannkic said:
What is the Python design philosophy? Medium ship with large ship power/thrust/weapon systems? Is that it's original design basis or have FD just introduced it not true to its origins? and are correcting that ?
Click to expand...

This is key: it is not about balancing, it is about correcting a ship. The Python is difficult to balance: it should be a trade ship that packs a heavy punch, and that is a fine line to walk on. Make it too weak and you basically have a glorified T7. Make it too strong and you get what you have now: people bringing a trade ship to a warzone. It is referred to sometimes as the space porcupine: powerful enough to keep scavengers at bay but too weak to function as a frontline battleship. Apparantly right now it leans slightly towards the too powerful side. Not in relation to a startership, as some anti-nerf people claim, but in relation to its own function. So they are toning it down a notch. We'll see how it goes: maybe it is still too strong and will get nerfed more. Maybe it will be too weak and it will be boosted later. Maybe it'll be perfectly fine. It is hard to predict, and only time and datamining can provide the answer.

Personally I think that the nerfed Python will still shine, but only if anarchy systems become much more dangerous while simultaneously increasing the profits you can get from trading there. There currently is no real need for a porcupine trader which may explain why people use it in a more offensive role. So when that gets nerfed people feel the ship becomes pointless. That is semi-true. But that is not because the nerf is bad, but because the intended role of the Python is as of yet of little use.
 
Last edited:

Jex =TE=

Banned
J
Alpha November said:
It will be a shame if balance means 'Must be destroyable by a paper viper armed with two pea-shooters'. Big ships should be destroyable by groups of smaller ships, not lone wolves.
Click to expand...

This. They can reduce the Pythons maneuverability I have no issue with that but it's armour or shields should go up a little. If I'm in a sidewinder, on my own, I should not have a good chance to beat the python but if I did, I'd expect it to be one, long, hell of a fight.
 

IceyJones

Banned
I
Frontier brings the python into warzones.......as NPC´s!
if frontier wants the python to be a trade ship, why have they done that?!
they also dont bring a T7 or T9 into a warzone!

so frontier beats its own logic....

LOL

edit:
and the python looks like a fighter.....not like a trader at all!

edit2:
i suggest the ASP after the python nerf as python killer. more agile, can mass lock it, faster than the python and comperable shields then....
also smaller target....longer jump range and reasonable cargo! the 4 small beams are enough to drop the shields quick and 2 medium rails disable
the python in no time...

all this for 6 million (50 fully decked out).

so when does doe ASP nerf come then?!

and the viper nerf?!

but damn......then the cobra gets too strong.....so letz nerf it also!
 
Last edited:

Mrok

M
Most opinions are extreme, both ways. I got Python since last weekend, worked hard for it and now I hear about nerf. What I think about this whole mess:

- If developers really do think it needs adjustments they posted, than OK - I accept it. It's a game, no ship is perfect, it will still fly. I just want to be sure this is independent developers decision based on their research.

BUT

- If they did it becaouse of yelling of several frustrated players who can't get Python and are driven by pure envy, than it is VERY BAD.

I need to know only this to close the whole case. Please Developers, tell us it was your independend decision to nerf Python. No frustrated yelling was taken in to account. Right?
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom