Vyzion Eyri
The Southern Legion
The Umbra Combine
1653
   |
Posted - 2013.10.31 11:42:00 -
[1] - Quote
Interesting. This is kind of like the opposite of a thread I made a while ago. I suggested have all items unlocked initially, then skills focus on unlocking variants and passive bonuses.
Whilst I do love visionary threads like this and totally agree that the SP system needs an overhaul, one thing I really don't think we should do is limit SP gain to weapons we use. I used to hold your opinion on it, but I've changed my views based on my predictions that weapons are going to be changing for years to come, and new content being constantly added means it would be unwise to limit players to gaining SP and unlocking weapon customisation options only for their preferred weapon.
Once again (even I'm getting tired of this), I'd just like to point out the advantages tiercide has over this option. Weapon customisation will be so much easier to implement if all weapons were on equal footing and not distributed over tiers. Furthermore, variants! Tiercide and variants go hand in hand. What you say about 'submachine guns unlocking more submachine guns', that's perfect! Except not in terms of using the SMG constantly, but upgrading the SMG skill yourself. Progression through skill levels should not give passive bonuses (this is drawn from your ideas) but instead, unlock variants of weapons. Then proficiency should give maybe a SLIGHT passive bonus, but the main purpose of it should change to unlocking customisation options for the weapon.
> "I will show you fear in a handful of dust."
T.S. Eliot, The Wasteland
|
Vyzion Eyri
The Southern Legion
The Umbra Combine
1685
|
Posted - 2013.11.01 09:27:00 -
[2] - Quote
In terms of balance, passive bonuses are less 'unnecessary variables' than tiers. If we had a choice to remove one or the other, and we chose passive bonuses, it'd only be under the assumption they'll come back after rebalancing. If we remove tiers though, it would free up balancing for passive bonuses, for addition of variants, racial or otherwise, and more content in general. We should've got all the content in before adding tiers.
And that's what I've come to realise. If tiers go but come back, I wouldn't mind. I mean, look at vehicles. There are no tiers there, and now they're removing variants to rebalance, then reintroducing variants (hopefully with racial variants too). But passive skill bonuses are only changing; not disappearing altogether. We need passive bonuses as a cornerstone of progression, so that the 'thinking shooter' can outsmart the 'gun-game shooter', since we (yes, my gun-game is horrible) certainly can't outgun or outstrafe them.
Following the vehicle example, what if we remove tiers for everything, rebalanced on one tier (could be any tier, really), then considered the options? Obviously, this is no light decision. What I propose CCP does is give the community a choice: introduce ALL racial variants and lots of new content FOR ONE TIER, or keep the current tiered system and slowly release new content.
This is all under the assumption that CCP is slowed down from releasing new content because of tiers. This is simply an assumption that I made, and have not seen proof to make me think otherwise. If anyone has concrete proof that it is not the tier system that is restricting CCP from getting new content out quickly, please notify me.
> "I will show you fear in a handful of dust."
T.S. Eliot, The Wasteland
|