Fulcrum Suicide! Fulcrums Safety Feature is needed!

[Viper]

Kinda feel the same way here... I think I voted for making them more expensive / arming timer / and some other stuff, but if someone would ask me now, I would have a different opinion.
I suppose I voted the way I did to find a good compromise for both parties more than venting my own opinion.

There is one thing bothering me quite a lot:
It strikes me that since there has been increased activity from smaller 'bad guy' clans like [V], [CUP], [X] and possibly others, which are all quite proficient in utilizing Stealth Generators, Fulcrum Torpedo's, Proximity Mines etc, all the sudden the complains started rolling in. Whereas FT's and Stealth Generators have been fine the way they were as long as they have been around. But now all the sudden, they're not anymore?...

I could write a very long story here (actually I did but deleted it 'coz nobody will read it), but the point here is that I feel we should be very wary about this mentality.
If items are in the game and have been for many years, and we have never complained about them, then neither should we complain about them when they are used against us all the sudden. Those items were once designed to serve a certain purpose, to provide for a unique ability not provided by other items. And now that they ARE used, we start complaining about them? Come on!
As some of those same people now complaining, have sometimes said: "If it's in the game you can use it". So let's do that and stop moaning about it.

Stop complaining about it, get real and find something to counter it instead of moaning about it.


Cheers.

[SeeJay]

I kind of agree that the way it is now, the FT's are of no use anymore. (Except for trading)

I think that changing it back to where it was with the following changes would be better:
- Max 1 FT loaded on a ship.
- Auto save after launch so re-spawn with the weapon back won't work.

It was plenty of time to react as it was before with the warning in the chat window.

[-splosives-]

I've always had a major issue with Fullcrums, and so did other people. That's why they voted for change.
I used fulcrums because I was forced into a fulcrum war by our enemies a lot of times, but I hated it every time I had to use one.
Something had to be done about them, but unfortunately, most people voted for the wrong option.
I didn't want change for my own benefit, like a lot of people do. I voted for change because I know that it would make the game better for everyone.
That's why I voted to remove the fulcrum and replace it with something else, because that's the only sensible thing to do.


[Edited on 1-2-2013 by -splosives-]

[KingArthur]

IF A CHANGE MUST BE MADE MY OPINION IS TO MAKE AN FT A "Single Purpose Munition", that Being to STOP A STATION DETONATOR. Give It the SAME TIMER as the SD and ONLY ALLOW IT TO FIRE WITHIN 2000m OF AN SD OR JUST LEAVE IT AS IS !!!



WHY NOW, AFTER YEARS OF HAVING THIS WEAPON AT OUR DISPOSAL, ARE WE HAVING ANY PROBLEMS WITH IT? WITH THE "ESCAPE" TIMER VICE HAS ADDED ALL SHOULD REMAIN AS IS WITH THE FULCRUM TORPEDO!



WE CAN NO LONGER DEPLOY A SHIELD ARRAY IN A STATION BECAUSE A SMALL GROUP OF PILOTS HAVE MADE COMPLAINTS. THIS MAKES A PILOT VUNERABLE TO "STATION CAMPING" AND "HOSTILES IN WZ's. WHAT'S NEXT????










[Edited on 1-2-2013 by KingArthur]

[-splosives-]

Pretty colors and caps lock don't make your arguments any stronger, KA. Just saying .

[KingArthur]

But THEY DO STAND OUT, DON'T THEY.

[Viper]

Pretty colors and caps lock don't make your arguments any stronger, KA. Just saying .

I agree, I even find it pretty annoying, no offense intended. Nobody else does it, there's really no point to it what so ever. All it does is give the impression you want to voice your messages louder than everyone else. People wouldn't take your words any differently if you were to use normal font sizes and no colors.

IF A CHANGE MUST BE MADE MY OPINION IS TO MAKE AN FT A "Single Purpose Munition", that Being to STOP A STATION DETONATOR. Give It the SAME TIMER as the SD and ONLY ALLOW IT TO FIRE WITHIN 2000m OF AN SD OR JUST LEAVE IT AS IS !!!

I agree with the notion that changes made to the FT should be turned back (with a huge apology to Vice for the effort he has put in trying to accommodate the community), but the FT is a weapon of mass destruction. Using such a weapon to counter Station Detonators is very much besides the point of the FT I think.

On a related a note: a weapon of mass destruction should not be as easily available as the FT is now. So there should be some kind of limitation to the ability to buy them, or to their use. What the best option is, I'm not sure about.

[Edited on 1-2-2013 by Viper]

[-splosives-]

What if FT's are only for sale on hidden locations on planets? Gives you an extra reason for exploring and landing.

[Maarschalk]

The Purpose of FTs was never to counter act SDs. This was just a coincident discovery that they could be used as such and so Clans started using them as an easy way to protect their Stations!. The purpose of FTs is MASS DESTRUCTION!

Protecting Stations should not be easy by use of Weapons of Mass Destruction in this Case FTs!
If anything FTs should be able to Damage a Station instead of just destroying the SDs!

The FTs are still usefull for other things other than trade, they can still be used against AIs for a quick combat mission completion or if your surrounded by hordes of hostile AIs.

I think the Purpose of the FT and the way it funtions now is fine to prevent abuse against clans and Independants! To make it fair for EVERY ONE!
Actually now that I think about it the Abuse of it or any Abuse by Players is only in Multi-Play! And the Abuse against Indie Players can be controlled by the Server Operater Rules and Monitoring there of as has been in the past!

Although I am not in a Clan or ever have been, I have been playing these games for 4 years! And Fulcrums have been abused against Independants and ussually but not always the Server Operater would step in if He/She detected abuse of them! And I have heard big Clans complain about the little Clans and the little Clans complain about the big Clans constantly about the difficulty or ease of unfair methods of attacks and unfair methods of counter attacks!. A War is a War and nothing ever seems fair in a War!.....

[Marvin]

Or this: The FT comes in two parts. The missile itself, bought and sold as they are now. And antimatter. Both parts taken to a Carrier to create the actual weapon.

[zex]

So I was thinking about this topic - yes, I know I'm a [V] and therefore my pro-fulcrum arguments are probably looked at with a large amount of distrust, but I have only killed two pilots with a fulcrum throughout my career so bleh.

First, I want to say that this debate was initially started because people thought that using a fulcrum in a SUICIDE ATTACK, only to get that fulcrum back upon reload, was wrong. I completely agree with this - and I don't think anyone disagrees with this (except maybe an ingame troll here or there, but they have not made their opinion known yet). This original position devolved and was sidetracked by one who just wanted to see fulcrums removed altogether, and by people who wanted fulcrums to be adjusted to fit their own purposes. I'm not saying that these opinions aren't valid, mind you, only that they shouldn't be confused with the original position which was that being able to suicide and still retain the fulcrum is wrong.

While I appreciate Vice's efforts to fix what the community presented as an exploit, I believe the target has been missed. The only reason that the original issue is even addressed is that fulcrums are pretty much worthless now - you could still suicide and get them right back, you just don't want to because they are pointless.

So, I wanted to offer an alternate proposition that hasn't been presented yet. Mind you, I'm not sure of the technical feasibility of this, and would appreciate feedback in any form.

Death, in its current form, carries no penalty. Likewise, a kill on a pilot renders no real reward. Suicide fulcrum is not the only side effect of this. Pilots can save the game stocked with missles, stealth, and an SD one sector away, and constantly go after a station until it's gone, without any need to restock after they are taken out - or just bug a player without relenting despite how many times you take them out.

On death, I would like to see:

The current profile get loaded and resaved with empty secondary weapon bays, and possibly even cargo bays, this would create a penalty for death, but not anything excessive.

And, a random chance for any combination of the above to be dropped as cargo by the dead player - this would create a small but tangible reward for killing a player, and could make piracy and battlefield salvage player options. This would also present the dead player with a chance to make a quick shot back into the sector to recover some losses - without the ability to fire an instant excalibur set at the damage ship that just took them out.

Finally, fulcrum torpedoes and proxi mines returned to their former glory.

Not only does this address the original exploitative suicide problem, it also adds a much needed (albeit small) risk-reward element to multiplayer combat.

Thank you for reading, and I'll see you guys out there!

[Marvin]

Pretty colors and caps lock don't make your arguments any stronger, KA. Just saying .

"Strong and bitter words indicate a weak cause." -- Victor Hugo

[Rubber Chicken]

I'll admit I voted for the arming sequence because I was swayed by the argument that having a last resort tactical nuke would still be desirable. But now that I think about it, I would have voted for detonate on impact only.

The reason being that I missed the operative word - Torpedo. I have NEVER heard of a weapon classified as a torpedo that wasn't impact only. Any missile that has non-impact detonating capabilities is well... a missile - not a torpedo.

Also, impact only would make anti-stealth station detonation defense still possible. It would make Anti-Cap ship warfare still possible. But anti-fighter (unless near other hittable objects) very difficult.

But unfortunately without a save-on-launch feature (which Vice has ruled out as exploitable as well- or accidentally create alot of broken profiles) there will really not be a good anti-exploit solution.

I'm gonna have to admit that my current additude towards the whole thing is - If the fix is going to kill the fun for the non-exploiters, put 'em back how they were. But keep the discussion going. Maybe we will eventually come across a good solution.

*God, I never thought I'd hate waffles for breakfast....

P.S. I can confirm that I was one of Zex's FT kills. It was a fair attack. I will say however that had I been AWARE that it was an FT and not just another missile launch, I would have lived. Perhaps some RED text for the chat window when one is launched, and bringing back the 1.x critical alarm 'WHOOOP' for that particular event (IMO) would be nice.

P.P.S - Not too sure about the penalties for dying. They could make noobs have more difficulty advancing in the game and make other pilots/pirates into cargo farmers. Also not too sure about the empty secondaries either. Custom missiles wouldn't be very worth it if you had to remake them every time you died.

One thing I do think though is that the 1% reward in the territory for killing an opposing clan member is a bit low. Perhaps 5%? (but no more than 10%) That way battles would mean more than doing contracts and destroying stations. Since FT's do not register as 'Player X destroyed Player Y' they would be less desirable to use in clan battles.

[Edited on 1-2-2013 by Rubber Chicken]

[Maarschalk]

The repeated use of FTs for continues Suicide and annoyance of Players can be addresed by the Server Operators since this is only a problem in online Multi-Play.
Server Operators can set a rule of continues Suicide use of Fts to a limit of 3 or something just like any other rules if they are broken ban the player abusing or breaking the Server rules! Players are more likely to follow Server rules and this does not need a overhaul of game change code to please only some players!....

[zex]

One thing I do think though is that the 1% reward in the territory for killing an opposing clan member is a bit low. Perhaps 5%? (but no more than 10%) That way battles would mean more than doing contracts and destroying stations. Since FT's do not register as 'Player X destroyed Player Y' they would be less desirable to use in clan battles.

[Edited on 1-2-2013 by Rubber Chicken]

I don't even think it's 1% - isn't it like 1/4% ?

[Rubber Chicken]

I could be wrong. I'm really basing that figure off of fluctuations I've seen in Sapphire while PvP is going on.

[-splosives-]

Some examples why fulcrum torpedo's are bad.

1: FT's in AI combat.
FT's in AI combat, especially warzones, make the whole contract extremely easy to finish, it makes people gain rank with money instead of
skill, which results in high military ranks being worthless. Anybody can have a good military rank, because anybody can buy fulcrums.
Aside from that, it gives people the feeling that their flying and fighting skills are useless, because you might as well shoot an FT.
Firing FT's at AI is not fun, it's totally lame.

2: FT's in PvP combat.
In PvP, FT's are extremely annoying. Imagine you're having a good fight with someone. You're doing passes, you're doing damage, and then
your opponent fires an FT.
What happens? Or one of you (or both) dies, or you have to jump out and the fight is over. What an anticlimax.
There's a reason why FT's are not allowed in KA's jousts.

3: FT's in clan wars.
Like many people already said: the FT gets exploited, and used for suicide attacks.
Is this a fun way to fight a war? hell no!
If you don't even care if you die or not, that makes for a bad war. It totally ruins the game experience.

4: FT's to stop SD's.
This is just ridiculous. If somebody tries to blow up a precious building, is your first reaction to nuke that building?
Imagine if that happens to the white house. Would you nuke the white house if you know someone planted a bomb there?
Didn't think so. Instead you try to diffuse it.

5: FT's for trading.
Some people say "FT's are good for trading".
They are good trading goods, yes. In fact they're so good they break the whole game.
Trading in evochron is already kind of broken, and the FT's make it even more broken.
Having a lot of money in Evochron is not special. It doesn't take a lot of effort to get billions of cash.
This is partially because of the FT.

I personally can't think of any situation where the fulcrum torpedo does not negatively impact the overall gaming experience.
I tried to look at all these situations as objectively as I could be, so don't accuse me of wanting change for my own benefit.






[Edited on 1-2-2013 by -splosives-]

[Marvin]

The reason being that I missed the operative word - Torpedo. I have NEVER heard of a weapon classified as a torpedo that wasn't impact only. Any missile that has non-impact detonating capabilities is well... a missile - not a torpedo.

Somebody needs to read up on submarine warfare ... starting as far back as WWII. Both for German U-Boats and U.S. Fleet boats.

[zex]

Some examples why fulcrum torpedo's are bad.

1: FT's in AI combat.
FT's in AI combat, especially warzones, make the whole contract extremely easy to finish, it makes people gain rank with money instead of
skill, which results in high military ranks being worthless. Anybody can have a good military rank, because anybody can buy fulcrums.
Aside from that, it gives people the feeling that their flying and fighting skills are useless, because you might as well shoot an FT.
Firing FT's at AI is not fun, it's totally lame.

2: FT's in PvP combat.
In PvP, FT's are extremely annoying. Imagine you're having a good fight with someone. You're doing passes, you're doing damage, and then
your opponent fires an FT.
What happens? Or one of you (or both) dies, or you have to jump out and the fight is over. What an anticlimax.
There's a reason why FT's are not allowed in KA's jousts.

3: FT's in clan wars.
Like many people already said: the FT gets exploited, and used for suicide attacks.
Is this a fun way to fight a war? hell no!
If you don't even care if you die or not, that makes for a bad war. It totally ruins the game experience.

4: FT's to stop SD's.
This is just ridiculous. If somebody tries to blow up a precious building, is your first reaction to nuke that building?
Imagine if that happens to the white house. Would you nuke the white house if you know someone planted a bomb there?
Didn't think so. Instead you try to diffuse it.

5: FT's for trading.
Some people say "FT's are good for trading".
They are good trading goods, yes. In fact they're so good they break the whole game.
Trading in evochron is already kind of broken, and the FT's make it even more broken.
Having a lot of money in Evochron is not special. It doesn't take a lot of effort to get billions of cash.
This is partially because of the FT.

I personally can't think of any situation where the fulcrum torpedo does not negatively impact the overall gaming experience.
I tried to look at all these situations as objectively as I could be, so don't accuse me of wanting change for my own benefit.



[Edited on 1-2-2013 by -splosives-]

Splosives, if you were referring to my comment, I do not think you are one of the people who wanted it changed for your own benefit. You were the person that I referred to that wanted them removed altogether. I think that you honestly want them removed for everyone's benefit.

Having said that, I agree with some of your points. I especially agree that the trade system could use an overhaul, although fulcrums are not the cause of this. Shield packs are much more lucrative now, anyway. Commodities aren't really valuable enough to trade, it would be really neat to have some higher-end luxury items in the trade game, or items that are completely worthless in some systems and worth a lot in others.

While I agree that nuking someone who is using an SD is counter-intuitive, changing the fulcrum to do station damage would make station detonation trivial, and make station detonators a waste of time (why not just nuke the station instead!).

I think the argument that it is annoying in PvP is not a good argument. People who are mad at how people fight are simply not willing to adapt their tactics to counter the tactic they are mad at. Eventually, this mentality would narrow combat to a very boring scenario.

The argument that fulcrums make ranking easy is not a good argument. You can find lost packages for the Navy and rescue cargo pods too. If you are spending money on fulcrums for contracts in an attempt to do things the easy way, you're doing it wrong. Anyone who devotes themselves to gaining military rank can achieve their goal - and saying that this shouldn't be the case sounds elitist.

A fulcrum torpedo is great for firing at a bunch of clowns sitting in one area. It is intended as a massively powerful m/am annihilation, and should be returned to its former glory.

[Maarschalk]

I think the argument that it is annoying in PvP is not a good argument. People who are mad at how people fight are simply not willing to adapt their tactics to counter the tactic they are mad at. Eventually, this mentality would narrow combat to a very boring scenario.

It has happened that while PvP battles where going on that another player who was not participating in the PvP just wanted to anoy the players PvPing and launched FTs Destroying them selfs and the Players PvPing! Players PvPing usssualy set the rules before they engage each other in a duel and it is ussualy the norm that FTs ar not to be used in a PvP duel since using them for suicide does not give you a win!......

[-splosives-]

I think the argument that it is annoying in PvP is not a good argument. People who are mad at how people fight are simply not willing to adapt their tactics to counter the tactic they are mad at. Eventually, this mentality would narrow combat to a very boring scenario.

Oh, I got a ton of tactics against the FT. It's just not fun to do. It comes down to getting out of a fight, and not getting into one.
I like to get into fights.

[Marvin]

I think the argument that it is annoying in PvP is not a good argument. People who are mad at how people fight are simply not willing to adapt their tactics to counter the tactic they are mad at. Eventually, this mentality would narrow combat to a very boring scenario.

It has happened that while PvP battles where going on that another player who was not participating in the PvP just wanted to anoy the players PvPing and launched FTs Destroying them selfs and the Players PvPing! Players PvPing usssualy set the rules before they engage each other in a duel and it is ussualy the norm that FTs ar not to be used in a PvP duel since using them for suicide does not give you a win!......

True. But pilots can be just as annoying without resorting to FTs. If you delete one option, you'd need to delete them all.

[DennyMala]

Meh, it seems there are more people here voicing about their cause than those trying to help Vice make a better game.

I've used FTs in the past for fast contracts in hostile zones when I was alone or with Marvin and they worked great to take out an entire flight of reds, cap ship included. not at all a suicidal weapon as I never died once from my own launch.

When used against me I only died once in the blast, then realized how to move accordingly and FTs became only a very expensive firework to be launched near where I (but IM altogether) was operating. You get out, than get back and into the fight again.

Someone that was doing so eventually had to negotiate a peace with us or become basically unable to play without us on the back shooting.

To me the problem is maybe in the savegame function that allows some exploit on special equipment and probably in the station detonation sequence that was designed with a timer in mind to expose the operator and to make it essential to have a team effort and that has been tricked into a one man black ops.

My vote sits where it was to revert any change to the FT and maybe start thinking about something we can make to the issue stated just in the line over.

[Edited on 3/1/2013 by DennyMala]

[Munshine]

I think the argument that it is annoying in PvP is not a good argument. People who are mad at how people fight are simply not willing to adapt their tactics to counter the tactic they are mad at. Eventually, this mentality would narrow combat to a very boring scenario.

Oh, I got a ton of tactics against the FT. It's just not fun to do. It comes down to getting out of a fight, and not getting into one.
I like to get into fights.

I haven't dpne a lot of Pvp but with or without FTs, in space you can always temporarly "flee" the fight if your ship is severly crippled which gives you the time to refresh yourself or doing the hide and chase way. So I don't think the FTs is really an issue here.

Actually PVP in space is pretty boring. It's why I prefer PVP in a cave where for obvious reasons Fts aren't allowed and where you can't flee the fight.

[-splosives-]

I've used FTs in the past for fast contracts in hostile zones when I was alone or with Marvin and they worked great to take out an entire flight of reds, cap ship included.

They worked great, yes, to the point where it's just ridiculous. I think people shouldn't be able to take out a whole fleet with one push of a button.
I don't understand how anybody could enjoy this above killing them with cannons.
If you do enjoy it, then you're in luck, because FT's won't be scrapped from the game.