Galaxy Legion Forum
http://galaxylegion.com/forum/

pvp damadge needs to be looked at
http://galaxylegion.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=31624
Page 1 of 4

Author:  zom [ Fri Dec 14, 2012 1:48 am ]
Post subject:  pvp damadge needs to be looked at

this topic is in suggestions ideas but i do belive it needs to be here also

i finally came across a super ssb built ship the ship had no att or defense moduals but had 60k hull and no shields. they also had 3k att and 1200 defense i was at 9600 att and 5500 defense and they were damaging me routinely around 330-400 to my 120-180 for damage. now if you look thats me with over 3 times there att and 4 1/2 times there defense there is no reason at all why they were winning other then the formula is designed poorly. he literally had no att or defensive structures on. i dont care what analagy you use but in no way can logically tell me he should be out damaging me at all.

my reasoning is this your calculators main stat for pvp combat seems to be about deck size not offense or defense i belive that is wrong.

Author:  KJReed [ Fri Dec 14, 2012 1:51 am ]
Post subject:  Re: pvp damadge needs to be looked at

I don't care how big your machine gun is the chances you are able to nail a mosquito with one is nil.
Whatever kinda tiny guns that mosquito is using, at least its actually hitting the target.

Author:  varunjitsingh146 [ Fri Dec 14, 2012 1:51 am ]
Post subject:  Re: pvp damadge needs to be looked at

you probably have a way bigger damage cap then they do.

Author:  KJReed [ Fri Dec 14, 2012 1:57 am ]
Post subject:  Re: pvp damadge needs to be looked at

varunjitsingh146 wrote:
you probably have a way bigger damage cap then they do.

That's what hes whining about. He found a tough ship that either worked hard, or spent alot. And he doesn't like it.

Author:  varunjitsingh146 [ Fri Dec 14, 2012 2:03 am ]
Post subject:  Re: pvp damadge needs to be looked at

KJReed wrote:
varunjitsingh146 wrote:
you probably have a way bigger damage cap then they do.

That's what hes whining about. He found a tough ship that either worked hard, or spent alot. And he doesn't like it.

ahh ok. sorry, guess i misread then ^_^; to me it looked like he was confused about why the damage was being dealt the way it was.

Author:  varunjitsingh146 [ Fri Dec 14, 2012 2:03 am ]
Post subject:  Re: pvp damadge needs to be looked at

KJReed wrote:
varunjitsingh146 wrote:
you probably have a way bigger damage cap then they do.

That's what hes whining about. He found a tough ship that either worked hard, or spent alot. And he doesn't like it.

ahh ok. sorry, guess i misread then ^_^; to me it looked like he was confused about why the damage was being dealt the way it was.

Author:  zom [ Fri Dec 14, 2012 2:03 am ]
Post subject:  Re: pvp damadge needs to be looked at

KJReed wrote:
varunjitsingh146 wrote:
you probably have a way bigger damage cap then they do.

That's what hes whining about. He found a tough ship that either worked hard, or spent alot. And he doesn't like it.


2 items im not whining im simply stating the design is wrong. where ever have you seen a ship with no guns or defense ever out damage a larger ship. it doesnt happen the limiting factor should not be about deck size and as i stated the mosquito didnt have better guns then me he had no guns.

Author:  playret0195x [ Fri Dec 14, 2012 2:03 am ]
Post subject:  Re: pvp damadge needs to be looked at

They shouldn't be able to do that much damage in comparison.

How about a formula for max damage output? Like 1/2 your rank or decks, whichever is smaller.

Author:  zom [ Fri Dec 14, 2012 2:07 am ]
Post subject:  Re: pvp damadge needs to be looked at

again im not saying i should one shot him i understand that he will be hard to hit im saying theres no way he should be out damaging me not when he has such a weaker ship.

Author:  KJReed [ Fri Dec 14, 2012 2:13 am ]
Post subject:  Re: pvp damadge needs to be looked at

The point is you can't hit him.
A rock that never misses beats a gun that never hits.

Author:  zom [ Fri Dec 14, 2012 2:23 am ]
Post subject:  Re: pvp damadge needs to be looked at

KJReed wrote:
The point is you can't hit him.
A rock that never misses beats a gun that never hits.


again he didnt even have a rock to through he had nothing. your trying to defend the idea that in a war game att and defense have no value only the size of a ship has value and no where ever has a sammer ship without guns defeated a larger ship with guns.

Author:  KJReed [ Fri Dec 14, 2012 2:42 am ]
Post subject:  Re: pvp damadge needs to be looked at

zom wrote:
KJReed wrote:
The point is you can't hit him.
A rock that never misses beats a gun that never hits.


again he didnt even have a rock to through he had nothing. your trying to defend the idea that in a war game att and defense have no value only the size of a ship has value and no where ever has a sammer ship without guns defeated a larger ship with guns.

The def value isn't normal def. Its maneuverability.
def in the normal sense is hull. there is no hit points, because once the hull is penetrated that's it.
And attack and def do have value. As you even said originally he does have attack (which goes against your most recent statement saying he doesn't have guns. just because their aren't extra guns equipped that you can see doesn't mean theres none at all. ALL ships have guns.) That's how he damaged you.
And def too has value. His is just more effective than yours

Author:  zom [ Fri Dec 14, 2012 3:43 am ]
Post subject:  Re: pvp damadge needs to be looked at

KJReed wrote:
zom wrote:
KJReed wrote:
The point is you can't hit him.
A rock that never misses beats a gun that never hits.


again he didnt even have a rock to through he had nothing. your trying to defend the idea that in a war game att and defense have no value only the size of a ship has value and no where ever has a sammer ship without guns defeated a larger ship with guns.

The def value isn't normal def. Its maneuverability.
def in the normal sense is hull. there is no hit points, because once the hull is penetrated that's it.
And attack and def do have value. As you even said originally he does have attack (which goes against your most recent statement saying he doesn't have guns. just because their aren't extra guns equipped that you can see doesn't mean theres none at all. ALL ships have guns.) That's how he damaged you.
And def too has value. His is just more effective than yours


first off your hull is your hit points not your defense . what your doing is saying deck size is defense that is where i disagree with the equations being used because his att and defense value is way below mine. what i have been saying and will continue to say is when 2 ships meat and my att to defense value is a 6 and his is att to defense value is a .54 in no way should his att then do twice the amount of damage as mine

Author:  NeRd135 [ Fri Dec 14, 2012 3:56 am ]
Post subject:  Re: pvp damadge needs to be looked at

Are the attack values from that ship from using a probe, or what's displayed in the results? If you're going by what's displayed to you, run an attack and def probe on the ship. I'll bet his crew is substantial.

Author:  zom [ Fri Dec 14, 2012 3:58 am ]
Post subject:  Re: pvp damadge needs to be looked at

those were att and defensive probe numbers and verified because i probed him while buffed and unbuffed

Author:  KJReed [ Fri Dec 14, 2012 4:33 am ]
Post subject:  Re: pvp damadge needs to be looked at

Gl is more like real life. In rl there is no such thing as defense as it is used in alot of games. There is armor though(hull). Also there is also no such thing as hit points. In the real world if you get shot you die. you get through the armor and hit they are dead.

As I have said many times defense equals maneuverability. how fast you can move in case that term is confusing you.

A car with 1k horsepower will move a ton faster than a giant tank will with 2k horsepower.

And guess what? That car can drive so fast even with a smaller engine that it can drive circles around that tank. It can go around faster than that tank can aim. This means that tank never really hits the car directly. But the whole time the car is driving around the tank it is scoring direct hits. Even though it is using a smaller gun and it will take awhile to get through the tanks armor, at least it is hitting.

Author:  zom [ Fri Dec 14, 2012 5:04 am ]
Post subject:  Re: pvp damadge needs to be looked at

KJReed wrote:
Gl is more like real life. In rl there is no such thing as defense as it is used in alot of games. There is armor though(hull). Also there is also no such thing as hit points. In the real world if you get shot you die. you get through the armor and hit they are dead.

As I have said many times defense equals maneuverability. how fast you can move in case that term is confusing you.

A car with 1k horsepower will move a ton faster than a giant tank will with 2k horsepower.

And guess what? That car can drive so fast even with a smaller engine that it can drive circles around that tank. It can go around faster than that tank can aim. This means that tank never really hits the car directly. But the whole time the car is driving around the tank it is scoring direct hits. Even though it is using a smaller gun and it will take awhile to get through the tanks armor, at least it is hitting.


the problem is we are playing a game its not real life and we are both scoring hits but because his ship is smaller his guns do more damage that makes no sense. now you equate ship size as a factor in defense i can give you that but what i cant give you is when a ship with less guns and less defense does more damage that i cant give. when you compare att to def values i had a 6 he had a .5 im not saying that i should one shot him or have it over quick what i am saying is his guns were so inferior that he shouldnt be doing twice the damage.

Author:  KJReed [ Fri Dec 14, 2012 5:15 am ]
Post subject:  Re: pvp damadge needs to be looked at

zom wrote:
KJReed wrote:
Gl is more like real life. In rl there is no such thing as defense as it is used in alot of games. There is armor though(hull). Also there is also no such thing as hit points. In the real world if you get shot you die. you get through the armor and hit they are dead.

As I have said many times defense equals maneuverability. how fast you can move in case that term is confusing you.

A car with 1k horsepower will move a ton faster than a giant tank will with 2k horsepower.

And guess what? That car can drive so fast even with a smaller engine that it can drive circles around that tank. It can go around faster than that tank can aim. This means that tank never really hits the car directly. But the whole time the car is driving around the tank it is scoring direct hits. Even though it is using a smaller gun and it will take awhile to get through the tanks armor, at least it is hitting.


the problem is we are playing a game its not real life and we are both scoring hits but because his ship is smaller his guns do more damage that makes no sense. now you equate ship size as a factor in defense i can give you that but what i cant give you is when a ship with less guns and less defense does more damage that i cant give. when you compare att to def values i had a 6 he had a .5 im not saying that i should one shot him or have it over quick what i am saying is his guns were so inferior that he shouldnt be doing twice the damage.

you are only hitting him with glancing blows while he is making direct hits. the majority of your force is wasted while his is entirely effective.

Author:  bobdebouwer [ Fri Dec 14, 2012 10:34 am ]
Post subject:  Re: pvp damadge needs to be looked at

OMFG, another one of these "I cant beat everyone up easily, change the rules to help me" or "someone built a better ship than me wah wah wah, Dan mess them up for me please"

Author:  Peticks [ Fri Dec 14, 2012 12:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: pvp damadge needs to be looked at

No its fine as it is.
If you wanted to go massive ship then thats your choice just dont come crying that its totaly unfair when someone who went small ship kicks your ass.

Page 1 of 4 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/