|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514
Turalyon Alliance
4463
   |
Posted - 2013.10.30 22:21:00 -
[1] - Quote
Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:Justin Tymes wrote:Yet another "X SP should mean superiority" thread. Save your SP > skill rant for when 1.7 comes out.  Your roll eyes emote and your 1 line dismissive response lies on-top of a confusing point. Your say that SP should not add value, i.e superior abilities or gear. If this is not the function of SP as you say then what do you think skill points should do? What are they for in your version of DUST?
As I know you're a reasonable man Judge, I would like to add my concerns to this.
The idea that SP and ISK confers more than just a straight combat advantage is abhorrent to myself and a number of others - I suspect King Checkmate is objecting less to the idea of vehicles being strong and more to the idea of them being completely dominant simply because the users have spent more ISK and SP.
If, say, a forge gun has perfectly positioned itself behind a tank with an excellent aim at the weak point, but it is only a standard forge gun, should it ever be able to take out the tank? There are active modules to account for, of course, but in the average situation should that forge gun be able to take out that tank? The tank user has spent more ISK - perhaps SP too, but that is debatable.
I would compare this to a militia assault rifle user successfully flanking a prototype suit and aiming at the head. In that case, the militia gear is perfectly capable of destroying the protosuit. What I would like to see in AV/Vehicle balance is a situation where SP confers an advantage, but where large amounts of spending does not ensure complete dominance over lesser equipment.
The situation that is potentially developing (should the forge gun nerf be as severe as the swarm launcher nerf) is that low tier gear is physically incapable of destroying a vehicle at its tier. Again, many would argue that it should take multiple people to destroy vehicles, and that everything should be balanced based on a vehicle's performance in PC against grouped proto AV - but what happens then is that in pubmatches tanks become stomping machines. Of course there's the option of bringing out co-ordinated AV, but how often does that actually happen in a pubmatch? New players join the game only to find themselves repeatedly dominated by tanks. They may well switch to their AV fits - but if the advantage conferred by spending so much isk on the tank is too great, they will be completely unable to do anything against the machine terrorising their team.
Certainly that isk should have value - but should it have enough value to create a frustrating experience for all the other players? Rather than see vehicles in an expensive but dominant position like this, would it not be better to, say, reduce the price of vehicles instead?
Level 4 Forum Warrior
Lenin of the glorious armoured revolution
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514
Turalyon Alliance
4463
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 22:23:00 -
[2] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:KING CHECKMATE wrote:Foxhound Elite wrote:I like to see people giving out about the upcoming changes to AV. You've had it coming, and stop complaining about how it's going to look about in the future vs. Tanks. I see nobodys saying 'but we won't have any way to fend off stomping dropship pilots' , ... it's because dropship pilots rarely get a chance to make any impact. Why, you say? Because it only takes one swarm launcher, one forge gunner or one rail installation user to remove the threat of even the most skilled of pilots from the battlefield.
Stop your whining, you'll have together to take out vehicles, which is what it should be. Vehicle users spend more ISK and SP than you, in an open one vs one battle, they should always crush you. Only where you use your surroundings and fellow teammates to help, then you should overcome the vehicular opposition, unless they fail due to pilot error otherwise.
Im not crying, im learning how to drive tanks....BTW this: '' Vehicle users spend more ISK and SP than you, in an open one vs one battle, they should always crush you. '' Is the most stupid thing i've read. If this game ends up being: Better equipment > Skill IM LEAVING.I dont give a flying f*** if your tank costs 50 million isk, if im better i should be able to drop your butt. PERIOD. @ the end of the day, as you said, is 1 on 1 , you are just wearing a mechanical, more expensive suit.... A 1 on 1 battle that cannot be won no matter what , makes a game broken. Just saying King... 1v1 Tanker vs AV- Tanker spends 10 Mill to get where they are at, AV spends 5 Mill...... 1vs 2 Tanker vs AVers- Tanker spends 10 Mill to get where they are at, AV spend, between them 10 Million. Balance of SP, ISK, and effort is equalised.
Manpower and versatility is a significant factor as well. An HAV can kill AV, infantry, and other vehicles. An AV user can only really effectively kill vehicles, forge gun sniping aside. Additionally, if it takes two AV players to take out one person in a tank, then that takes two players off the field who are dedicated to taking out that tank while it only takes off one person from the other team, who can do a lot more than that.
Level 4 Forum Warrior
Lenin of the glorious armoured revolution
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514
Turalyon Alliance
4463
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 22:29:00 -
[3] - Quote
Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:I was not advocating one position or the other. I wanted to know if Justin, who thinks SP should not give an advantage, would see the purpose and function of skill points.
If skill points do givr and advantage, the determination of the size of this advantage is the balance. If they give no advantage what then?
This is the crucial point - how much of an advantage does that SP and ISK give?
It certainly should give an advantage. It shouldn't be too little, otherwise it would be pointless to spend that SP and ISK. But it shouldn't be too great either, or people would simply invest that ISK/SP and stomp everything.
Level 4 Forum Warrior
Lenin of the glorious armoured revolution
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514
Turalyon Alliance
4463
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 22:38:00 -
[4] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:I was not advocating one position or the other. I wanted to know if Justin, who thinks SP should not give an advantage, would see the purpose and function of skill points.
If skill points do givr and advantage, the determination of the size of this advantage is the balance. If they give no advantage what then? This is the crucial point - how much of an advantage does that SP and ISK give? It certainly should give an advantage. It shouldn't be too little, otherwise it would be pointless to spend that SP and ISK. But it shouldn't be too great either, or people would simply invest that ISK/SP and stomp everything. You fly EVE side though Arkena you know how much SP and ISK give in terms of advantages. Why should Dust be any different? Admittedly this is a new format for a competitive FPS.... which without SP does not feel all that competitive.
Oh yes, it certainly does give an advantage. But it is still entirely possible to destroy superior ships without superior numbers if you fit accordingly and use the appropriate tactics. If I see an Enyo on field and I only have tech I frigates available, I use a suitable frigate to counter it.
If done correctly, the Enyo will die. It will have had an advantage from the ISK and SP invested in it, yes. But when it is outplayed then it dies regardless.
The point here is that superior numbers and superior equipment should not be the only solutions to the problem. Better tactics should work.
Level 4 Forum Warrior
Lenin of the glorious armoured revolution
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514
Turalyon Alliance
4463
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 22:40:00 -
[5] - Quote
Needless Sacermendor wrote:Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:I was not advocating one position or the other. I wanted to know what Justin, who thinks SP should not give an advantage, would see as the purpose and function of skill points.
If skill points do give and advantage, the determination of the size of this advantage is the balance. If they give no advantage what then? He didn't say it shouldn't give an advantage ... he said it shouldn't give superiority or be greater than skill ... try reading properly.
Let's not begin accusing each other of not reading properly - simply correct them and move on. Whilst I'm guilty of doing that myself at times, we have an opportunity here to have a reasonable discussion. I see some fairly reasonable people from both sides of the debate here.
Level 4 Forum Warrior
Lenin of the glorious armoured revolution
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514
Turalyon Alliance
4464
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 22:49:00 -
[6] - Quote
Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:Lets take a hypothetical :
A tank and a Swarm launcher face each other in a field. What determines who wins? Is it fair that the one with more SP and ISK investment has a higher chance when skill is not considered to win? If not then what incentive do people have to earn SP and spend ISK?
Does it feel fun, and fair that 120k can kill 2.5 million ISK as easily as 2.5 can kill 120k?
Is it fun to know you cannot even dent 2.5million with 120k?
Where skill is not a factor, the one with the higher ISK and SP investment should win. However, skill should be a factor.
As for your two questions:
1. No.
2. No.
What are your thoughts on reducing the price gap? That way vehicles aren't massively frustrating to lose or to face.
Level 4 Forum Warrior
Lenin of the glorious armoured revolution
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514
Turalyon Alliance
4464
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 22:56:00 -
[7] - Quote
Void Echo wrote:Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:Lets take a hypothetical :
A tank and a Swarm launcher face each other in a field. What determines who wins? Is it fair that the one with more SP and ISK investment has a higher chance when skill is not considered to win? If not then what incentive do people have to earn SP and spend ISK?
Does it feel fun, and fair that 120k can kill 2.5 million ISK as easily as 2.5 can kill 120k?
Is it fun to know you cannot even dent 2.5million with 120k?
Where skill is not a factor, the one with the higher ISK and SP investment should win. However, skill should be a factor. As for your two questions: 1. No. 2. No. What are your thoughts on reducing the price gap? That way vehicles aren't massively frustrating to lose or to face. then again, should skill increase the odds of the investment anyway? if no then why bother trying to skill into gallente proto assault when militia minmitar will be more powerful?
I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say here.
Do you mean that SP has an effect on the effectiveness of your isk investment or actual player skill?
For both, certainly. SP should have an effect - why bother having it otherwise? Player skill should also have an effect.
I suspect the apparent lack of skill in using swarms is partly causing much of your frustration. A homing, fire and forget weapon takes a lot of player skill out of the equation. It reduces AV/Vehicle balance when comparing with swarm launchers almost to raw numbers.
Would you be happier with swarms, if, completely hypothetically, they were dumbfire? That's just an example and not a serious suggestion, as there are a host of problems with that in the current state of things, but would you be happier with them if they required more skill to apply their full damage but if they managed to do that did notable damage?
Level 4 Forum Warrior
Lenin of the glorious armoured revolution
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514
Turalyon Alliance
4465
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 22:59:00 -
[8] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Justin Tymes wrote:Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:I was not advocating one position or the other. I wanted to know what Justin, who thinks SP should not give an advantage, would see as the purpose and function of skill points.
If skill points do give and advantage, the determination of the size of this advantage is the balance. If they give no advantage what then? It should give an advantage but that advantage must be relative with everything else in the game. I have about 15mill invested into making a complete Gallente Logistics suit right now. I should always be able to be solo'd, because that's the way Dust works. Tanks already have an advantage to being immune to most weapons, and have the ability to kill anything in seconds, if that. Which is fine but AV has to be your counter. 1 man should be able to solo another man regardless of the SP wall. 1 man should not be bending numerical advantage to his will, simply because he decided to bring a well-fit tank in play, that completely goes against skill. Okay solo fine but your talking about a frigate trying to destroy a battle cruiser here. Its not that ******* easy.
Taking out a battlecruiser with a frigate is perfectly doable provided you do things correctly. Of course the battlecruiser has an advantage for the greater investment, but if it is outplayed by the frigate it may still die.
This is a fairly good analogy, actually. Ideally here we should also have a situation where skill and tactics have a significant effect on the outcome and if done incorrectly the 'frigate' should be easily destroyed and the 'battlecruiser' should laugh off the damage.
Level 4 Forum Warrior
Lenin of the glorious armoured revolution
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514
Turalyon Alliance
4465
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 23:03:00 -
[9] - Quote
Needless Sacermendor wrote:Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:Lets take a hypothetical :
A tank and a Swarm launcher face each other in a field. What determines who wins? Is it fair that the one with more SP and ISK investment has a higher chance when skill is not considered to win? If not then what incentive do people have to earn SP and spend ISK?
Does it feel fun, and fair that 120k can kill 2.5 million ISK as easily as 2.5 can kill 120k?
Is it fun to know you cannot even dent 2.5million with 120k?
Your hypothetical is dumb ... you can't not consider skill ... a HAV and a Swarm user face each other in a field, even if the swarm is on a proto Heavy suit stacked with as much ehp as possible and the HAV is a militia hull with a militia turret it will be dead before the first volley of swarms leaves the launcher, whether the HAV is fitted with blasters, missiles or rails (maybe not missiles these days). IF you people had your way (which is what we seem to be aiming towards) the ONLY incentive to earn SP and ISK would be to invest in HAVs so you could be competitive.
I completely understand your concern that HAVs might become completely dominant. However, ISK and SP should confer some advantage. Not overwhelmingly so - but some, enough to be overcome by skill.
In this case, where skill is removed from the equation and it can be assumed to be equal, the greater investment wins. That is only natural. That's what Judge is trying to say - however, I personally believe that skill should have a significant input on the situation and I suspect Judge does as well. All other things equal however, and the greater investment should win.
Level 4 Forum Warrior
Lenin of the glorious armoured revolution
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514
Turalyon Alliance
4465
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 23:04:00 -
[10] - Quote
Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:By "you people" do you mean someone asking a simple question in a neutral way? You answered, aggressively, but there is an answer in there.
Unfortunately this is really a product of the excessive vitriol found in AV/Vehicle threads - it tends to come from both sides and has lead to an 'us and them' mentality.
Level 4 Forum Warrior
Lenin of the glorious armoured revolution
|
|
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514
Turalyon Alliance
4466
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 23:16:00 -
[11] - Quote
Void Echo wrote:Needless Sacermendor wrote:Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:And he did say that. If a thing is not superior, then it has no properties that are greater than; then this means it is equal. A single property that is greater/superior would mean the whole is greater if no other properties are changed. Wrong ... you're definition is of something that is better ... something that is superior has every property better and is in another league and cannot be beaten by. A proto dropsuit with complex extenders n plates n proto weapons is not superior to a militia fitting ... because a militia fitting is capable of killing proto fittings. SP and ISK do not make you superior or replace skill ... what it does do is give you an advantage ... you can extend that advantage over all aspects of your fitting, but it will NEVER make you superior as skill can still defeat you. its a giant contradiction then, theres no way this would work in real life.
Congratulations on attaining forum warrior level 2. 
Needless Sacermendor - I suppose if you define superior as that then yes, things should not be superior due to isk investment alone. I agree - skill should certainly allow lesser investments to defeat greater investments. It worries me that protosuits are so dominant in the infantry vs infantry area at the moment, but they can at least still be killed.
Void Echo - Would you mind terribly clarifying what you think is contradicting itself? I'm a little baffled, and I would very much like to hear your feelings clearly on the matter.
Level 4 Forum Warrior
Lenin of the glorious armoured revolution
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514
Turalyon Alliance
4467
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 23:32:00 -
[12] - Quote
Void Echo wrote:Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Void Echo wrote:Needless Sacermendor wrote:Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:And he did say that. If a thing is not superior, then it has no properties that are greater than; then this means it is equal. A single property that is greater/superior would mean the whole is greater if no other properties are changed. Wrong ... you're definition is of something that is better ... something that is superior has every property better and is in another league and cannot be beaten by. A proto dropsuit with complex extenders n plates n proto weapons is not superior to a militia fitting ... because a militia fitting is capable of killing proto fittings. SP and ISK do not make you superior or replace skill ... what it does do is give you an advantage ... you can extend that advantage over all aspects of your fitting, but it will NEVER make you superior as skill can still defeat you. its a giant contradiction then, theres no way this would work in real life. Congratulations on attaining forum warrior level 2. Needless Sacermendor - I suppose if you define superior as that then yes, things should not be superior due to isk investment alone. I agree - skill should certainly allow lesser investments to defeat greater investments. It worries me that protosuits are so dominant in the infantry vs infantry area at the moment, but they can at least still be killed. Void Echo - Would you mind terribly clarifying what you think is contradicting itself? I'm a little baffled, and I would very much like to hear your feelings clearly on the matter. whats contradicting about it is that here personal investment is present and so is personal skill... by there reasoning personal investment should not mean anything when it comes to the game. by this standing they are saying that there is no point of me skilling into the gallente proto assault suit because according to them, the militia minmitar suit will be far more powerful because it requires no personal investment whatsoever and the gallente proto suit will be nearly worthless because it requires personal investment. basically punishing anyone attempting to put more into the game than they are. their argument is a giant contradiction. understand?
I'm afraid I don't. Why can't they co-exist? Where SP acts as a force multiplier for skill, conferring a greater advantage? If skill is equal, then in your example the Gallente proto assault suit would beat the militia Minmatar suit handily, as a greater amount of ISK and SP is invested in the Gallente proto assault. If the Gallente proto assault has more skill, then the militia suit is still screwed. However, if the militia Minmatar suit has more skill than the Gallente proto assault, then it should be able to kill them.
Can't a similar concept be applied to vehicles? Where investment rewards you, but you can still be outplayed?
Level 4 Forum Warrior
Lenin of the glorious armoured revolution
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514
Turalyon Alliance
4469
|
Posted - 2013.10.30 23:52:00 -
[13] - Quote
Void Echo wrote:Lorhak Gannarsein wrote:So...
what exactly is the point of tanks, in the end?
I drive the damn things and I've not a clue.
What's their role? What are they supposed to be used for?
How can you balance them if you don't know what FOR? according to the people currently posting, there is no point because suits should be more powerful than an entire planet, so tanks are a giant contradiction because they require tremendous personal investment for absolutely nothing.
I wish it wouldn't come to this every time there's a discussion about this topic.
No.
For the fourth time - Investment should give an advantage, but it shouldn't mean that you automatically win against anything of lower investment.
Level 4 Forum Warrior
Lenin of the glorious armoured revolution
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514
Turalyon Alliance
4471
|
Posted - 2013.10.31 00:47:00 -
[14] - Quote
Void Echo wrote:answer my question:
why should I put all of my personal investment and skill into tanks when a heavy who has put so little investment into his would be far more efficient? what would be the point of skilling into something if another thing could do its job better at a much lower investment requirement?
also, where would be the balance between "skill" and personal investment in this game when "skill would completely denounce logic when fighting far superior equipment?
A heavy is not far more efficient at killing than a tank. The current state of heavies is laughable.
Your second question does not make sense.
I have a rough idea of what you're talking about though - Are you saying that if you have superior equipment you should be completely unkillable by inferior equipment?
If so, then I disagree. Strenuously. This game already has enough problems with newbie stomping without it becoming literally impossible for newbies to compete.
Level 4 Forum Warrior
Lenin of the glorious armoured revolution
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514
Turalyon Alliance
4472
|
Posted - 2013.10.31 00:56:00 -
[15] - Quote
Void Echo wrote:Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Void Echo wrote:answer my question:
why should I put all of my personal investment and skill into tanks when a heavy who has put so little investment into his would be far more efficient? what would be the point of skilling into something if another thing could do its job better at a much lower investment requirement?
also, where would be the balance between "skill" and personal investment in this game when "skill would completely denounce logic when fighting far superior equipment? A heavy is not far more efficient at killing than a tank. The current state of heavies is laughable. Your second question does not make sense. I have a rough idea of what you're talking about though - Are you saying that if you have superior equipment you should be completely unkillable by inferior equipment? If so, then I disagree. Strenuously. This game already has enough problems with newbie stomping without it becoming literally impossible for newbies to compete. look at my post on this page. also that was an example. and btw heavies are more efficient than tanks are money wise. if im going against a full team of proto suits in only a militia suit, should I be able to wipe the floor with them?
Oh yes, more efficient isk wise. My BPO suits are infinitely efficient, whilst we're on that subject. Perhaps you should drop everything and run for them if that's so important?
A heavy suit is not as effective at killing as a tank is, nor is it as durable. Not efficient, effective.
Part of what balances spending large amounts of isk are diminishing returns per isk. Otherwise prototype suits would be even more powerful and actually sustainable - neither of which would be good for the game. Similarly, you pay for the power of HAVs. You can ***** and whine about how you don't think you're invincible enough, but you are investing isk for more power.
That's a ridiculously loaded example. Obviously not - not only is your gear outmatched, you are also outnumbered. Even if they're complete retards you're going to get wrecked.
The examples I was giving were where skill could tip the scales, not make everything else completely irrelevant. You have to be deliberately misinterpreting me now because I honestly believe someone can't be that stupid.
I'm done. I tried to be reasonable with you. It took 6 pages, but I've realised you can't be reasoned with. Congratulations.
Level 4 Forum Warrior
Lenin of the glorious armoured revolution
|
|
|
| |
|