|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Skihids
Bullet Cluster
Legacy Rising
2880
   |
Posted - 2014.02.21 16:35:00 -
[1] - Quote
A more clear way to phrase the question is:
"To what extent should SP or ISK buy you an advantage over your opponent?"
Avoiding the hot button particulars of tanks, AV, particular guns, proficiency levels, etc., the question comes down to how much imbalance you want to allow in your game.
Stripped of these, most folks would admit that ISK shouldn't buy you more than a 25% advantage over your opponent. They don't want WoW levels of invincibility for SP either, as this is a FPS/MMO rather than a straight up MMO.
So why have tanks, or any other vehicle for that matter if they can't be invincible? For variety!
That's right, they can be different without being OP. They can fulfill different roles rather than trying to be "Super Colossal" drop suits. That's where CCP was going with the "waves of opportunity" thing, leaving aside the implementation failures atm. The idea was to make them more powerful for a period of time while making them more vulnerable at others such that the sum total was still equal to a standard infantry player.
So as was stated upthread we could introduce lighter armor that would be infantry killers and let tanks hunt those and be mediocre against infantry by themselves. That adds variety to the game. Or we could have multi-crew vehicles where the sum total of the crew determines the power of the vehicle. In a way that's still an advantage for the vehicle as it generates automatic teamwork for them while leaving open the possibility the opposition can't get it together to coordinate. That could be a big problem in public matches so these vehicles might be limited to FW or PC matches.
TL/DR:
Vehicles should add variety to play styles, not alter the overall power balance by allowing you to use ISK or SP to gain an overwhelming advantage. |
Skihids
Bullet Cluster
Legacy Rising
2882
|
Posted - 2014.02.21 17:32:00 -
[2] - Quote
People need to stop focusing on their little niche and think about the game as a whole.
Forget "It's a tank!" or "It's a freaking Javelin!", and think about balance and variety.
CCP is ultimately in charge, but people need to come to some agreement about how much ISK or SP should influence game balance, and do it outside the context of any particular role.
There is a spectrum of opinions, ranging from the hardcore tiericide that ISK and SP should buy only variety and not a single percentage of advantage, to folks who advocate WoW levels of advantage for either. The first is espoused by those who want player skill to be the determining factor in every situation and the latter by folks more comfortable with MMOs than traditional FPS.
If you think ISK should buy a 100-300% advantage, then that holds true for every role, not just the one you happened to choose. So if an expensive tank should be worth three standard infantry AV, then infantry should be able to purchase gun just as expensive such that they would be able to fight 2-3 normal tanks at once.
You choose the level of imbalance people can buy, and then anyone can buy it. It's just like when your mother makes you or your bother cut the cake and allows the other to choose the piece. It leads to a much more balanced division. |
|
|
| |
|