|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Eskel Bondfree
DUST University
Ivy League
157
   |
Posted - 2013.11.07 21:36:00 -
[1] - Quote
Agreed, tiericide it must be!
It's bull crap, especially in an FPS, that higher level gear and skills simply mean "5% better at everything". Higher level should mean more options and more flexibility instead. Any advantage should come with a drawback of some kind.
Just look at the assault rifles. A prototype AR has better damage, range and accuracy than a basic one, not a single drawback. 10% damage bonus, plus 15% damage bonus from proficiency skill. Those two numbers are snowballing into a whooping 31.8% extra damage if you compare a basic and a protoype fitting that both use two complex damage mods. Who came up with this in an FPS?
A stacked team of clan players against a bunch of randoms will always result in loop sided match, but if each of the former has an extra 30% damage and health, it gets that much more frustrating. |
Eskel Bondfree
DUST University
Ivy League
157
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 17:34:00 -
[2] - Quote
Quil Evrything wrote:Eskel Bondfree wrote:Agreed, tiericide it must be!
It's bull crap, especially in an FPS, that higher level gear and skills simply mean "5% better at everything". Higher level should mean more options and more flexibility instead. Any advantage should come with a drawback of some kind.
They do. They take lots more power. Which makes sense. It's silly to claim we need to make all weapons somehow equal (which is what your argument will eventually boil down to, attempting to give drawbacks to supposedly balance out the gains)
My point is that the stacking of damage boni is what disrupts balance in an FPS the most. There's no reason why advancing in the skill tree has to unlock a gun with more damage, making the same gun of lower tier obsolete (unless you're broke and can't afford the higher tier). Advancing in skill should unlock a different variant of the weapon, one that has a comparable killing power, but a different use case. Like the burst, breach and tactical variants of the AR (provided they all would actually be useful). There is a lot of room for variety playing with ROF, accuracy, range, number of bullets per magazin, type of scope, fire mode and special attributes like the charge feature of the scrambler rifle.
Instead, we get basic and prototype weapons. So one half of the players in a match is running around with super high powered rifles, while the other half is not. This does not create fun game play in an FPS.
Multiplying every item in the game by 3 to create different tiers just inflates the amount of items artificially and makes it seem there is a lot to chose from. In reality, there are four different assault rifles, two different scrambler rifles, and soon we'll have two combat and two rail rifles. You could condense those 10 weapons into a single weapon class, unlock two of them on each skill level and we would be fine. |
Eskel Bondfree
DUST University
Ivy League
161
|
Posted - 2013.11.09 16:54:00 -
[3] - Quote
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:I'd prefer if weapons, modules, and equipment weren't tiercided. Lower tier stuff is good for reducing PG/CPU consumption.
Nothing would stop you from making a weapon variant with lower CPU/PG requirements and decreased performance, like lower range, smaller clip size, or reduced ROF. You don't need tiers for that. Also look at all the 'stable' variants of equipment we have right now: they have lower fitting requirements and a somewhat worse performance.
There is also the option to introduce a whole new weapon class based on this characteristic, like the carbine. It would perform not as good as an AR, but leave more room for fitting modules. If you think about it, comparing a basic AR to a Duvolle right now already feels like comparing a carbine to an assault rifle in any other shooter that follows the Battlefield formula. |
|
|
| |
|