With this update, the devs have showcased an astounding lack of understanding of their own game

Reverse the patch. Combine gear lube and rudder into one piece. Provide those with gear lube and/or rudder opportunity to transmute this into the new combined item or give them equivalent upgrade parts as compensation..

 

I was also on board with combining both into one piece that could contain special health perks! Sadly since that wasn't chosen and they basically pushed an update that can't be rolled back we have to push onward. I know not everyone is liking how agile every ship is (including their own) but its a meta changing update. The people that adapt to the new meta the fastest will raise in infamy and gain coins.

 

The balancing that happens is completely minimal, it’s roughly once every 3-6 months and they only tweak a couple items at a time, despite the fact that there are plenty of balance issues to be picked apart. Look at other mobile games like Clash Royale - they address as many balance issues as possible with monthly changes.

That wasn’t what I said, I said that I wanted agility to be cut back a large amount (but not to what it was originally). The reasoning for that was built into the rest of the post.

Who asked for max agility? Literally no one.

 

I do believe removing GL and rudder was a stupid choice. Sure, people got very angry when they got the ( rather shitty, I will agree) items, but the low agility of the ships made speeders... usable. It gave people a strategy. There was diversity.

What the devs need to do at this point is first of all balance out the agility, and then pump out new items. Especially blue, green, and yellow.

 

Lawdy .. the way people get so worked up about the smallest of things always blows my mind .. So, going off-topic here is purely to respond.

It could also be off-topic, not the point of my post, and just a side thought that I didn't want to detract from the post itself ... Which could have been the reason for the "nearly invisible text."

But, sure .. You are obviously better suited to make these assumptions about the inner workings of my thought process than I am.

Umm .. I already addressed all the points he made in the OP fairly. So, how was this advancing any argument ...? Particularly in light of the post itself.

Again, "attempting to discredit his reputation" is quite the leap .. I don't believe I've ever felt the need to discredit reputation of a person .. much less a username (in the forum of an online game). Regardless, I don't think one person would say that their opinion of a person's reputation changed in the slightest based on one small off-topic sentence .. But, if you say so.

In this thread, you haven't. And I don't believe I've cited the stats either. So, again, I'm confused how I was advancing any argument....

Ok, gotcha ... the stats are not collected for the purpose of making any comment about what you believe to be "strong" or "weak."

Oh, wait ... I'm confused again.



..........................................



Anyways, to clarify, I view the stats more for their entertainment value rather than actual data of use rates .. For that purpose, the stats are fun to look at and I have no issue with them.

And, although I've seen the argument made over and over, I do not believe that even @Epicular would make the assertion that the site stats are remotely as accurate as actual usage rate ones the devs receive.

However, I do find an issue with certain conclusions drawn from those stats - including the "strength or weakness" of particular ships or items - made on the site and more often by other members of the forum.

1. Many players have items and ships selected in their profiles that are different than the ones they play.
2. Some players use one ship for pushing infamy and another for completing guild quests.
3. For many f2p players, and players occassionaly buying pearls, they are stuck with certain ships and items - and do not have the ability to switch those items regardless of balancing changes made to them.
4. There is no disclaimer that the stats may not (and likely are not) reflective of the true usage rates of ships and items.
5. Assuming that all raw data is untouched and updates are performed at regular intervals, there are still choices made regarding how to calculate the number of items used and - more importantly - the range of players selected.

I could also quote several members using the stats to purport that the site stat usage rates indicate which items needed balancing - but you can do a quick search to see all the screenshots posted here too.



Anywho, what judgement calls do I think would make the stats more accurate for determine strength/weakness of ships/items:

If the range only included the top 50/100/250/500 players - players that are likely playing more matches than the average NML player, experiencing more success with the ships/items used, and/or have the ability to change ships/items with meta changes - then the stats might be more reflective of what's item/ships are stronger/weaker.

This would also eliminate a large number of players that barely play, only play events, or have quit (and not had their infamy reduced yet) sitting around the bottom of NML.

These ranges would also make it easier to track players that are switching their ship/equipped items for guild quests or for the purposes of throwing the site numbers off - and make adjustments for those players.


..........................................

Interesting ..

Hypocrisy: the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.

Gotcha. Lesson learned.

Ok ... So this is a "PERSONAL ATTACK" ...

This is not:

Gotcha .. I'll use the proper verbage next time.

You would think ...

 

This statement contradicts the entire purpose of the thread. The players asking for customization are asking to give up agility, not to add more as per your anecdote. It's not different than the existing customization to increase or decrease camera sensitivity. It's a preference, not a balancing issue.

 

I should clarify what I meant by the following statement:

When I said this, I meant that it was laughable that you think I would go through so much effort to put together such a comprehensive resource for the community... only to intentionally manipulate the final results in order to push for specific balance changes. Because, if I were utilizing the site solely as a platform upon which to push what you perceive as my “agenda”, then the community would be my sole target - and the devs could easily disprove my stats. Again, it’s laughable that you think I would put so much effort into manipulating something with no plausible end result for me.

I may perceive certain items or ships to be imbalanced based on the stats - but no manipulation is occurring on that front.

Well obviously it’d be great if the stats included only the top 500 players, but that’s not possible through the game client. Only the top 50 players can be accessed, and that’s an incredibly small sample size. Ultimately that is why I opted for a different solution - which uses the guilds screen to take data from well over 200 NL players. In my opinion, the tradeoff is well worth it, because the greater sample size is much more representative - and NL is still a very very competitive league.

Actually, I think collecting from strictly the top 50 would make it much more likely that players within the dataset try to intentionally throw off the results. Because, as the system stands, it’s not as immediately clear whether or not a given player will be included in the dataset.

Many of the other potential problems with the data that you identified are not ones that I disagree with, but it should also be noted that none of those issues would produce any consistent biases for or against any particular item or ship. When a couple specific items are consistently on the top or the bottom of the charts for several weeks/months, then you can be pretty certain of the value that the Nightmare League places in those items.

Of course I would never deny that the devs likely have much more representative and thorough stats than I do, and there’s nothing that anyone can do about that. But I would be surprised if there were really any major differences between the dev’s data and my own data.

 

I see your point ... These two players probably play the same amount of matches each season and have the same level of success using those items, thus should be given equal weight in determining which items and ships are "strong or weak" ..




Edit note - lol I didn't mean to pick a blatant seal clubber with my example, but it still fits my description above.. And there are a hundred more examples if needed

 

This is interesting... there is still need for the perfect max amount for each ship though.

 

Well i m no expert but other ships are less upgradble with skill when comparing to speeder and Enfo.

 

There is 2/5 problem with that. That is Enfo And Fixer wont be able to use that. This idea will be a major buff for shooter and defender. While defender could be fine but No way Shooter Needs that buff.
Also What will a less agile speeder will do against heavy agility defender and shooters.
I be blunt its a BAD IDEA

 

Why were gear lube and rudder not used? (And why are defense perks not used)? Because other items/perks are working better than they were designed to (or I would assume designed to) ...

• On top of the shield HP and its bonuses, four epic HP perks (+600 HP) really add about 1200 HP (depending on the talents selected) .. because of the way it's calculated.

It's hard to pass that much life for some agility or turret speed. If they had recalculated shield HPs so that the perks and shields only added what they stated, GL/T might have been used more.

But there are more examples ...

• Nitro was not likely designed to be a glitch teleport that caused unregistered hits.
• HP perks on a Tshield were probably not designed to add ~45% more than the stated 75 HPs.
  
• OB was not likely meant to be a much better replacement for the turbo - giving Enfos dual shields and similar HP to Shooters.

Sooooo ..... if they recalculated TS HP perks the same way, TS would stop acting like a 3-slot item .. For Nitro, they could either start counting unregistered shots or refund the item's readiness on shots wasted on teleporting speeders. For OB, the effectiveness or duration could be decreased so that turbos are still needed.

But, it's all whatever at this point.

They have already begun to cave in to the complaining. The Shooter and Defender agility has already been nerfed since the update, while torpedoes and mortars are still hitting at accelerated speeds .. And, it's only a matter of time before BC, flare, and grenades are sped up enough to stick Shooters, Defenders and Fixers at the old hit rates while still allowing yellow boats to easily evade them.

Have you noticed the effect of the 3° spread on the gatlin gun? Wondered why? It's still accurate enough to hit red, blue, and green boat hit boxes with every shot, but just wide enough to miss yellow boat hit boxes ... oh, and it ignores defense (like the flare gun), which disadvantages which types of boats?

 

I actually have methods in place to combat these types of players from making it into the dataset.

-The second player would’ve been filtered out because they are required to have 7 or more items equipped

-The second player would’ve also been filtered out for their position at exactly 4000 infamy. A requirement to get into the dataset is to have an infamy standing of above 4000.

And again, even if the types of players in your second screenshot had been allowed into the dataset, there’s nothing indicating that, with a sample size of over 200, there’d be any particular, consistent biases generated for or against any ship or item (a point which you did not address).

 

Dev were really drunk back few days as it was proved by the firebomb event perk and then this update.

 

I didn't notice mortars and torps were sped up, can you confirm the percentage?


Again I play defender as a primary, it's much easier to dodge torps now and harder for me to get explosive cannon hits. I play a mortar speeder secondary and it's much harder to get mortars to hit

 

It wasn’t in the patch notes either. Bias Devs must have omitted it as part of the conspiracy.

 

Obviously, there is no "flight time" stat listed on mortars, so that's a little harder to "prove" .... assuming it's not clear as day to you.

But here's my Big Torp August 30th and today ... notice anything about the projectile speed? When I didn't change anything in crew talents ...

 

I’m always willing to admit when I’m wrong. It took me a while to go back through my screenshots to find something that shouldn’t have changed. And I think you’re right. It ‘appears’ projectile speeds might have increased for all weapons.



I appreciate you bringing this to my attention [and that you decided to edit out the rest of your post (magnanimity is an admirable quality)]

TBH I’m pretty damn shocked (not to mention annoyed) that they really would just change something like that, and not make any mention of it. This warrants a pretty big explanation from the Devs!

xArrogance: my humblest apologies. Good on you, nice friggin catch!