Recall Beacon Bug

[rancid roost]

This bug only began after the recent and terrible 1 second cooldown change. As seen from the video the beacons in FRE were only used 4 times total and yet they are registering as if they were used 6 times total.

Beacons thinking they are being used when they aren't -

• Crew that are returning from Enemy ship in order to antiboard (observe 18 second timestamp in mTLP) are registering as having used the beacons in FRE despite being currently in mTLP, you can see when they return teleport back into mTLP the FRE beacons suddenly become shaded out, meaning they're on cooldown. My crew then walk half way from mTLP to FRE, at which point the ghost cooldown ends and they teleport to FRE. At which point the beacons fully disappear. Meaning two uses were wasted as a result of the crews returning from enemy ship, yet they never actually used the beacons.

In sum just revert this change and save the headache it's garbage balance anyway.

[native ore]

This seems more of a bug than a balance issue. Perhaps went unnoticed till the beacon change.

I suppose that's why you put it in the bug posts

[worthy marsh]

i'll see about getting a fix in for this in the hotfix build

[rancid roost]

Yes. The balance was side commentary because its a garbage change

[worthy marsh]

So to be clear, because others are using your feedback as a push for not nerfing Recall Beacons at all, do you agree with their sentiment, or do you think it needs a different nerf?

btw the bug here has nth to do with the cooldown being added

it did help highlight the actual bug tho. You probably just didn't notice it before prior to cooldown being added

(basically there was a bug where the crew wasn't actually teleporting to the recall beacon but still consuming the charge)

[rancid roost]

Likely true because the shading of the cooldown allowed me to make a clear observation

[rancid roost]

Zero was in part speaking on my behalf (though also on his own behalf) weeks before the cooldown change was made when arguing against it. Yes I agree that beacons don't need nerfing, be it by creating a quantity limit or any fundamental design aspect like the cooldown or by applying a stun.

The changes unnecessarily buff both Telespam (my strat of which I took first place last month) and GA gunship (which has been taking first place the last few months). Neither strat needs this indirect buff

[rancid roost]

I see that it's Anna pushing my statements forward in test. Just a general sidenote for the future, keep in mind that she only argues "balance" that supports her own playstyle. Meanwhile my arguing against the cooldown is against my strats own gain because I fundamentally dislike it.

[graceful horizon]

Finally someone says it

[iron elk]

I'm curious why we would think the #1 player would want anything changed.

It's also obvious the existing change didn't do anything considering it's accidental also added limited beacon usage and still nobody saw a jump in telespam power OR a more limited usage of recall beacons.

Also, almost everyone in content testing agrees there should be some sort of nerf to beacons. Anna agreeing isn't helping her strat.

It's obvious Bran uses beacons and doesn't want them to have a cool down bc he uses the beacons without the cool down well.

[zenith belfry]

Speaking as a GA burst hybrid from 2021, returning back to the game, it's very obvious that beacons are incredibly strong. Players with them are much tougher to burn.

Frankly the main thing I note is how my burst DPS is so much weaker than the competition in LLPVP. Power creep has improved DPS output, it's improved repairers, it's improved shields, but it hasn't improved Galactic Alchemists.

When she was introduced she was wildly OP, IIRC the burn damage was reduced after a month. But she's worked the same way for five years and players have tools to counter her. This beacon bug obviously needs to be fixed, but the complaints in this thread simply don't match my experience

[graceful horizon]

1. He’s a telespammer… regardless of his ranking, he would welcome a beacon nerf
2. See annas ladder comparison which will show that beacon nerf did lead to an increase in telespammer strength on ladder
3. Idk why the opinion of „content testers“ (and there rly are only like 4-5 of you…) is any more valuable on the topic of general balance changes than the rest of us

[hazy moth]

You mean my ladder comparison?

[graceful horizon]

Oh ye perhaps it was u

[hazy moth]

[rain basin]

I fundamentally dislike the cooldown too 🤷🏼‍♀️

and I’ve suggested some alternative beacon changes that would directly harm my ship’s performance (not that it’s performing all too hot right now in the first place )

[half osprey]

If I was in the top one, and devs launched something that bugs my strat, I would want it to be reversed and not touched.
That is the problem with the current updates, something is launched and you have a possibility of losing your position due to a bug, you had one patch where you couldn't play pvp, imagine if you are in top 1 and get that bug? That's why some people (speaking of me) don't want these updates, they are launched bugged.
And that's why you have some threads asking to reverse the updates.

[iron elk]

Well, I'm not necessarily talking about the bug. Obviously bugs are bad and annoying. Also, it's pretty obvious that bugs or not, the top players would rather everything stay the same so they can continue to stay at the top with no changes.

[half osprey]

Agree, I'm in favor of changes and meta shift, and I don't agree with Bran about this cooldown being a bad start of reworking beacon, even though I can see why it makes burst and telespam a bit stronger. But in this thread we are discussing a bug, and in my understanding Bran wanted to say that is better not releasing a feature that is bugged, and keep things as it was

[native ore]

Well it was that, but Bran also very cleary stated an opinion on the change as well as told kildare when he asked.

[half osprey]

Probably because he is speaking in a position of it being a bad fix because it will make strong strat even more strong and I am speaking in a position of beacons being overused and first priority module of every ship strat, and I can see different points of view, and not saying, "why we would think the #1 player would want anything changed."

[iron elk]

#1373804935468159048 message

Kildare asked specifically about the nerf to beacons, so I was defending the position of needing a beacon change, and that the top player is probably fine with nothing changing.

[half osprey]

What you said was rude, or at least it sound rude, sound something like "Why should we listen and let the top 1 player give his opinion" (I am sometimes rude in this discord too, but never wanted to make someone opinion less valid).
Bran don't want the beacon changes because in his point of view, he see only bad repercussions following those fixes, as it happened when the community wanted the drones to return to the origin room and then everyone understood that it is a bad idea.
And you said that Bran don't want to have any changes because he benefit of beacons and want to remain in top 1, abusing the beacon.
Everyone uses beacons, and if the nerf affects Bran, it will affect his opponents too. I really don't see how in your point of view Bran want to keep the old beacon just to abuse it, like he is doing some shenanigans that others couldn't do

[graceful horizon]

That’s bc trist likes to argue against beacons whether it makes sense or not

[hybrid ether]

All the arguments about beacons being strong against telespam are useless when the top 1 is telespam. And all the arguments about beacons benefiting the top 1 are useless when those who use the same strategy complain about the opposite. Conclusion: Don't change things that don't need to be changed without a good reason, testers should only look for real bugs like the one Bran mentioned at the beginning of the thread.

[solar crystal]

Don’t most people consider beacons to be a positive change?

[hybrid ether]

Making something that works well for everyone weaker is not something I consider to be a good change.

[half osprey]

I think the main reason the people are complaining is that the other modules became useless, comparing to the beacons, everyone puts 30+ beacons in their ship. People want to see more diversity related to modules, putting only beacons in your ship requires around 50 iq to plan everything.

[graceful horizon]

Yes but the 5 content testers decided that beacons are the devils work so they’ve been complaining about them 24/7 and savy decided to nerf them for that reason

[solar crystal]

Thats fair but honestly wasn’t it pretty much the same with barriers before xD

[graceful horizon]

Ye but barriers didn’t counter Tele spam so all was good :)

[solar crystal]

Fr

[half osprey]

it was +-, because you could see some sprinkles and some turrets, now you only see beacons

[solar crystal]

I mean beacons are much cheaper then barriers so I see that as a positive

[hybrid ether]

If they consider the beacons to be stronger than the other modules, aren't the other modules the ones that need changing?

[iron elk]

Sorry if it sounded rude. I did not intend it to be rude. My intention was that if I was the top ship, I would not want things to change and that everyone's opinion should be counted equally.

[graceful horizon]

That too. Like they cost 1/4 of a barrier so no wonder ppl will run them more often

[solar crystal]

Hmm turret are honestly in a weird place tbh

[graceful horizon]

Yep but savy logic is that buffing other modules would be „power creep“ (tho adding lvl 13 and more crew slots and room levels and energy and and and wasn’t power creep at all…)

So we are left to wonder why ppl use those mean beacons instead of the turrets that tickle enemy 40hp reapers with their cute 0.5atk

[solar crystal]

They could just add levels to stronger modules or something, like Thats already the case for higher tier turrets

[iron elk]

I'm okay with a buff to other modules, but Savy says no. So what else can we discuss other than needs to beacons?

[solar crystal]

Didn’t Kildare say they were fine with buffing other modules?

[graceful horizon]

If content testers soent half their time trying to convince savy that other modules are just in a bad spot than maybe we would’ve gotten there too

[hybrid ether]

facts ^

[iron elk]

Are you kidding? That was suggested and they said no. As was already said by you and me

#1373804935468159048 message

[graceful horizon]

? I said u should have convinced them that theyre wrong

700 messages discussing how to nerf beacons. Imagine if only 350 of them went into talking about how spooky power crept all other anti board modules and how dmg went through the roof with lvl 13 and barriers just don’t provide enough defense anymore

We have Xeon trying to nerf beacons to the level of (completely unused) mines

[solar crystal]

Suggesting that recall beacons should have the same drawbacks was certainly interesting

[iron elk]

If Savy says no, we can't just tell them yes. It doesn't work like that.

[solar crystal]

GA gunships certainly don’t need a buff so I’m fine with beacons staying the same

[half osprey]

The testers have almost 0 power compared to "The Vision" of the savy workers. If the players keep paying for bugged crew collections, and BPs with no special crew guaranteed and no room skin, then they will think their vision is correct

[iron elk]

Literally the thread created by Savy was one about balancing the beacons. Bringing up crew balance is not part of that discussion

[graceful horizon]

Module balance in general is tho. When ur argument is „beacons are used everywhere“ it wouldn’t take long for an astute observer to realize that that’s primarily due to other modules being underpowered, not beacons being overpowered

[solar crystal]

We should let one barrier block one emp shot 😎

[graceful horizon]

Unironically not even a bad idea

Tho emp cannon laughs at ur face. It would have to be a temporal emp immunity

[hybrid ether]

With the damage from the EMP canon it will probably never fulfill its function.

xD

[solar crystal]

Just gotta make it a temporary state of immunity like nightfury said

[hybrid ether]

I think we should leave those conversations for other threads. I'm leaving and I hope the adm can read what I said about the beacons.

[native ore]

Like trist pointed out. Thats not an option

[worthy marsh]

i don't know why ppl keep saying that we said no. We only said no to buffing LOWER tier modules that affects EVERYONE. But we're fine with buffing the top end which are currently limited, and also that we'd prefer buffing them as a last resort, but this is probably what we'll do

We've confirmed this in yesterday's AMA as well

[hybrid ether]

So what will be done with the beacons? Will the change made to them be reversed?

[worthy marsh]

haven't decided yet. But definitely not for this month's tournament

the plan was to observe the changes, so observe we shall

[graceful horizon]

Not an option hmm

[hazy moth]

Literally created by .Xeon.

[graceful horizon]

[misty sparrow]

I remember that in start everyone were ask for 1 sec stun for recall beacon but it was argued as nerfing beacon too much and therefore include EMP effect (1 sec) for beacon

[karmic vine]

No no no pls, I really dislike your statement about the 50 IQ thing.
And I only see telespammers complaining about beacon in test server chanel, Xeon to be accurate.
If he thinks beacon is too imbalanced and you think it easy to use, required ~50IQ to plan it, doesnt that make you worse than a 50IQ player that beats you?

[native ore]

Yall are making me need to buy into telespam strat just to prove my balance points (or others points )

[half osprey]

You completely missed my point. First when I was more active no one could beat me, I was a walking legend, everyone was afraid of me. Second, what requires more intelligence, put a beacon in every room, or analyse through battle experience what modules fits the best in each room?
What testers say no one should care, they are players just like us and usually have their own bias

[karmic vine]

Sorry that I did not get it right but really, I cannot get it right
Firstly, i did not even want to mention about you, just so you know. Because of your insult who use 'a lot' of beacon is 50IQ that lead to you as an example if those players beat you. Now speaking of bragging about yourself. Time change, people come and go, maybe you were a legend of your prime but who even care? Because we are talking about some CURRENT issue, current meta, which obviously you are not active enough to fully comprehend it. Or do you? Xeon was legend of his prime and what now? The point of this 50IQ thing is dragging people down cannot highlight you or support your opinion.
Secondly, what's so special about beacon? When everything can be special, then none is. You can also abuse beacons but obviously you cant use them effectively like some others. Let me ask you about the pre-beacon time, what did people abuse? Tons of steel barriers? Did anyone complain about them or how tedious with single type module built? But in fact, the whole point of this is that you can provide other reasons to persuade us, without calling them boring and insult other with your 50IQ. By the way, I haven't opposed about the beacon nerf so far.
Finally, this conversation is completely irrelevent to this post so I will stop it right here.

[half osprey]

As I said, you completely missed my point, I am talking about choosing the modules that you want to put in your ship, not how you play the game with beacons and abuse them. I am talking about how you build your ship (in this case how you put modules), pre beacons you could see top players use of sprinkles, mines and turrets, the current state is just putting the beacon and don't think much about it because the beacon will outperform every other module. There is nothing wrong with using only beacons, but some players want more diverse gameplay, what is the point of having mines in this game if they are useless?