Increasing the cost of Teleporter

[mooneye]

This reminds me the similar argument" hunter was too strong'
Actually only 5% players can play hunter well enough to counter a titan. Now hunter was emasculated and noobies are happy: we are safer now,but we can be safer if tele is emasculated as well.

Just a little note: People argue something is imbalanced when nearly everyone plays the item. If this is true: Is the gold hull imbalanced? Are speed upgrades/speed pack imbalanced? Are batteries imbalanced? What else is imbalanced according to that?
Isn't it rather: something might be imbalanced? Are there items which have a specific role making it impossible to fall in this category of imbalance implication?


btw: i rather think bt is very very close to being perfectly balanced.

eDiT_

use the Edit Function next Time plz

thx
SirJ

[SirJoghurt]

U think the teleporter is too strong because u might always play a role as prey. The cost is the same to all. The best way avoiding feeding is to get a tele ASAP instead of weapons. Noobs are always reluctant to buy hulls and tele or speedboost. The lasers are always more attractive to them.

and i think u have no plan who Shifti is xD
dont call ppl n00b or Feeeder if u dont know them

and again:

Porter is Imbalanced for his price =)

who does not agree this, know`s it, and just wants too keep this advantage, point

and BT sure not is nearly balanced perfect, there many thinks which could be worked on
not really big things, but many small

[Prog]

who does not agree this, know`s it, and just wants too keep this advantage, point

Formidable argumentation, thumbs up!


In my point of view this shows perfectly that the disagreement is more fundamental, some sort of epistemic necessary reason which distincts the view on the game. Somehow there is no consensus about how bt should look like. Personally i'm pro fast and aggressive gameplay, which does need a teleporter as soon as possible, so i can't (really just can't, becouse of epistemic reasons) see any valueble reason to nerf the teleporter, upgrade speed, etc.

The interesting thing is, that the players argueing for imbaness of teleporter the most, are those who don't play clangames very often. Why?

(1)
Reasons not related to balance issues. Doesn't concern us here that much.

(2)

maybe the reason is i dont play AT`s, cause in the last AT`s i played with... 6 of 10 ppl had porter/posion, of course not all with the same Tank... but not the Tanks/Weapons are the point, the point still is that the Porter is to strong for its price =)

The problem here just is: Battletanks evolves dynamicly. Internal games 3 months ago looked a lot different than now and 1 year ago even more. When someone plays some games and doesn't like the current playstyle and stops playing those games from then on, he won't even notice that the gameplay differs in a couple of months. He just can't. Of course his view on balance should be questioned becouse of that (and only this view).
Now one can argue, that this player still plays now and then. But is this samplesize valueble for a good judgement about a very complex game? I doubt it is. (important for (1) as well)

Btw: Shift1: Why do you want to nerf the porter? I just read "it's too strong", but why do you think it is too strong?


Some more general thoughts about the argumentation: There is the argument "6 of 10 ppl had porter/posion, of course not all with the same Tank... but not the Tanks/Weapons are the point, the point still is that the Porter is to strong for its price " (SirJoghurt). Let's just grant for now that something which is played by a majority is imba (i questioned that allready, but there was no respond so i can just emphasize it once again) and grant it's those strat you mentioned (which I'd doubt as well judging from the clangames). We got 3 factors influencing: Tank, Poison, Porter. Players got different tanks, so we can drop the tank factor and got Poison and Porter. Now your conclusion is: Porter is too strong. Where does this conlusion come from? You got the axiom "Poison and Porter is too strong implies Porter is too strong"?

Another thought: Your elimination of the Tank factor goes like "players play different tank with those items and all of them are too strong - > items must be too strong". But why don't you conclude like this concourning the teleporter? You say: "the difference is, that porter+Longrange or porter+ maybe 3 e-canons for example is not imbalanced" (SirJoghurt). If you say so, why is the teleporter still too strong and not the item only appearing in allegedly imba builds, the Poison Magic? Of Course you can't do so, becouse it's way too obvious that poison alone is not too strong becouse there are a lot of builds with it not called too strong by you (i assume). So we would get into a position: Tank can't be the reason alone, Porter can't be the reason alone, Poison can't be the reason alone. What to do now? Just pic randomly one of those 3 and it happens to be the Teleporter? Or is there any other reason behind the ones you posted? If the combination of 3 factors is said to be imbalanced, is it the correct way of adapting to nerf one of them or are there ways to nerf the combination instead of the factors combined? Nerf one factor will nerf some other things which are not imbalanced according to you as well, which implies making them too weak (the porter + long range you mentioned for example). Is this the best way to reach alleged balance, making things too weak? Or rather: Is it the best way to balance by removing one alleged imbalance and add another one? I doubt it is.

[Althend]

Concerning myself. I use teleport often but I think that the range is much more the problem.
Currently the range is so high that from anywhere from the map you can easily get a cp to attack/defend. It induces a dynamique of the game where the position of your tank is less important than at the begining.

Reducing the range would make people have to pay more attention to their position, keep an eye one their distance form cp/base and then makeing the utilisation of teleporter less "noobish-friendly"
From 3500 to 3000 would probably increase the gameplay ^_^


The most annoying stuff is the "hit and run", we need a consumable to prevent people from teleporting at begining. (contrary to breaker that stops at arrival)

That is why long time ago I suggested advanced breaker and portal device: http://forum.btanks.net/viewtopic.php?f=...ker#p27741


Concerning the low range weapon. It is an old trend, currently, most people goes on 1050 range :p

[Paladon]

Yeah, for 8.66, the range will be reduced by 500 and the mana cost increased by 5.

[Prog]

I just fear the gamelength will increase significantly :/

[Shift1]

to your question, Prog:it increases your agillity to such a high point, that you simply get money / help teammates /rescue yourself so often that the money you will get out of this item surpasses the money you´d get out of a weapon of the same prizecategory by far. it is easy to use (at least to use it properly) but has great effects since it has no delay and u can use it in fights (what i appreciate). Also the range is very high. I like those things since i believe it makes the game faster and more entertaining- but if your really say bt is nearly perfectly ballanced im sorry to tell you that this definately aint true. if it was, much more people would play it

happy to hear porter will get at least a little bit weaker.

PS: i like the new skin

[TKF]

I just fear the gamelength will increase significantly :/

The nerf isn't significantly enough imo. But I see your point.