|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Michael Arck
Onuoto Uakan Huogaatsu
2805
   |
Posted - 2014.01.24 23:53:00 -
[1] - Quote
You put one bad idea into the forums and watch the natives go nuts repeating that bad idea. This is typical in this forum. The tank thread brought about the idea of removing the redline....which is very bad idea by short sighted folks. Let's not forget the AR, that needed a nerf but folks wanted to exclude the fact that there were a less amount of racial weapon variants available at the time, so of course majority of folks had ARs and of course it seemed too lethal when folks been popping its triggers for months on end.
Now its the RR. In which the pattern continues yet again. Over abundance is what drives this. An over abundance of death. An over abundance of its usage. Those two things push the idea that the RR must be nerfed somehow.
Also, people flocking to RR is nothing more than the option in COD that allows you to gain the same weapons as you recent killer. So folks get killed by RR, they run and get the RR. Which furthers pushes the idea to many who fall to it that somehow it needs to be nerfed since, more deaths has come from the RR and more people are learning how to use the rifle.
The question is, if it were the CR, would it happen the same way? More than likely, yes. The problem here is that the community, as stated many times before, don't think objectively when viewing the unique problems. They would have the charge time increased and if so, causes those FOTM users to switch over since its been changed. Then they would probably try the CR and then the CR will become famous. Then the community will cry for the nerf hammers for that as well, without thinking that, hey, plenty deaths and usage doesn't equate to it being nerfed.
The same thing happened with tanks. Tanks on the first day of the changes, were flooding the field. Instead of folks thinking that it will all pass because its the new toys, they cry "Tank 514!!!" from the top of their lungs because of the over abundance of usage and deaths. Tanks are nowhere near the same problem that it once was when the changes came. No one is talking about that though.
This is the never ending facepalming formula that I have experienced on these forums time and time again. It never stops and they never learn. The community, better yet the majority of the community, is hell bent on nerfing anything that kills them too much or is used too much. So essentially, they are wanting to nerf the users of those items. But you can't do that, so you just nerf the weapons that they use in attempt to find something that would give them even ground. Nevermind that skill has nothing to do with this. He killed me with that too many times, that's gotta be nerfed.
This is happened in COD, where dual wielding SMGs were strong and killed many. Same thing with Halo with the battle rifle.
I enjoy coming to the forums, but it boogles me sometimes how people view this game and view what needs to be nerfed or not. If the opinions were objective, then I wouldn't have much to say. But they aren't.
Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu.
For the State!!
[email protected]
|
Michael Arck
Onuoto Uakan Huogaatsu
2805
|
Posted - 2014.01.25 00:15:00 -
[2] - Quote
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:Michael Arck wrote:You put one bad idea into the forums and watch the natives go nuts repeating that bad idea. This is typical in this forum. The tank thread brought about the idea of removing the redline....which is very bad idea by short sighted folks. Let's not forget the AR, that needed a nerf but folks wanted to exclude the fact that there were a less amount of racial weapon variants available at the time, so of course majority of folks had ARs and of course it seemed too lethal when folks been popping its triggers for months on end.
Now its the RR. In which the pattern continues yet again. Over abundance is what drives this. An over abundance of death. An over abundance of its usage. Those two things push the idea that the RR must be nerfed somehow.
Also, people flocking to RR is nothing more than the option in COD that allows you to gain the same weapons as you recent killer. So folks get killed by RR, they run and get the RR. Which furthers pushes the idea to many who fall to it that somehow it needs to be nerfed since, more deaths has come from the RR and more people are learning how to use the rifle.
The question is, if it were the CR, would it happen the same way? More than likely, yes. The problem here is that the community, as stated many times before, don't think objectively when viewing the unique problems. They would have the charge time increased and if so, causes those FOTM users to switch over since its been changed. Then they would probably try the CR and then the CR will become famous. Then the community will cry for the nerf hammers for that as well, without thinking that, hey, plenty deaths and usage doesn't equate to it being nerfed.
The same thing happened with tanks. Tanks on the first day of the changes, were flooding the field. Instead of folks thinking that it will all pass because its the new toys, they cry "Tank 514!!!" from the top of their lungs because of the over abundance of usage and deaths. Tanks are nowhere near the same problem that it once was when the changes came. No one is talking about that though.
This is the never ending facepalming formula that I have experienced on these forums time and time again. It never stops and they never learn. The community, better yet the majority of the community, is hell bent on nerfing anything that kills them too much or is used too much. So essentially, they are wanting to nerf the users of those items. But you can't do that, so you just nerf the weapons that they use in attempt to find something that would give them even ground. Nevermind that skill has nothing to do with this. He killed me with that too many times, that's gotta be nerfed.
This is happened in COD, where dual wielding SMGs were strong and killed many. Same thing with Halo with the battle rifle.
I enjoy coming to the forums, but it boogles me sometimes how people view this game and view what needs to be nerfed or not. If the opinions were objective, then I wouldn't have much to say. But they aren't. You complain about the irrational need to nerf whatever is getting the kills, yet you are being irrational by dismissing the numbers and my analysis based on your own feelings. My argument wasn't "there are too many RRs killing me!", my argument was "if it has more range, it should have less DPS and less close range effectiveness to compensate". You are the one not being objective here.
It's obvious my post is saying that I'm tired of hearing these RR nerf necessity threads. I understand what you're saying, I'm not a brain dead mercenary here. Your bandwagon thread lead me to create that long post.
Second, the RR is just fine the way it is. Just what is supposed to do in close range? Spray confetti at you with clown horns to boot?
DPS? It's a freakin rail rifle with rail technology!! Of course the DPS is going to be pretty big!!!
Smh
Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu.
For the State!!
[email protected]
|
Michael Arck
Onuoto Uakan Huogaatsu
2805
|
Posted - 2014.01.25 00:33:00 -
[3] - Quote
Justin Tymes wrote:Michael Arck wrote:KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:Michael Arck wrote:You put one bad idea into the forums and watch the natives go nuts repeating that bad idea. This is typical in this forum. The tank thread brought about the idea of removing the redline....which is very bad idea by short sighted folks. Let's not forget the AR, that needed a nerf but folks wanted to exclude the fact that there were a less amount of racial weapon variants available at the time, so of course majority of folks had ARs and of course it seemed too lethal when folks been popping its triggers for months on end.
Now its the RR. In which the pattern continues yet again. Over abundance is what drives this. An over abundance of death. An over abundance of its usage. Those two things push the idea that the RR must be nerfed somehow.
Also, people flocking to RR is nothing more than the option in COD that allows you to gain the same weapons as you recent killer. So folks get killed by RR, they run and get the RR. Which furthers pushes the idea to many who fall to it that somehow it needs to be nerfed since, more deaths has come from the RR and more people are learning how to use the rifle.
The question is, if it were the CR, would it happen the same way? More than likely, yes. The problem here is that the community, as stated many times before, don't think objectively when viewing the unique problems. They would have the charge time increased and if so, causes those FOTM users to switch over since its been changed. Then they would probably try the CR and then the CR will become famous. Then the community will cry for the nerf hammers for that as well, without thinking that, hey, plenty deaths and usage doesn't equate to it being nerfed.
The same thing happened with tanks. Tanks on the first day of the changes, were flooding the field. Instead of folks thinking that it will all pass because its the new toys, they cry "Tank 514!!!" from the top of their lungs because of the over abundance of usage and deaths. Tanks are nowhere near the same problem that it once was when the changes came. No one is talking about that though.
This is the never ending facepalming formula that I have experienced on these forums time and time again. It never stops and they never learn. The community, better yet the majority of the community, is hell bent on nerfing anything that kills them too much or is used too much. So essentially, they are wanting to nerf the users of those items. But you can't do that, so you just nerf the weapons that they use in attempt to find something that would give them even ground. Nevermind that skill has nothing to do with this. He killed me with that too many times, that's gotta be nerfed.
This is happened in COD, where dual wielding SMGs were strong and killed many. Same thing with Halo with the battle rifle.
I enjoy coming to the forums, but it boogles me sometimes how people view this game and view what needs to be nerfed or not. If the opinions were objective, then I wouldn't have much to say. But they aren't. You complain about the irrational need to nerf whatever is getting the kills, yet you are being irrational by dismissing the numbers and my analysis based on your own feelings. My argument wasn't "there are too many RRs killing me!", my argument was "if it has more range, it should have less DPS and less close range effectiveness to compensate". You are the one not being objective here. It's obvious my post is saying that I'm tired of hearing these RR nerf necessity threads. I understand what you're saying, I'm not a brain dead mercenary here. Your bandwagon thread lead me to create that long post. Second, the RR is just fine the way it is. Just what is supposed to do in close range? Spray confetti at you with clown horns to boot? DPS? It's a freakin rail rifle with rail technology!! Of course the DPS is going to be pretty big!!! Smh And just what are Lasers and MD users suppose to do when they're being beaten in all ranges by the RR?
And just what am I supposed to do when a MD and Laser got sights on me? Please man. I was here on manus peak getting my dropsuit burned to a crisp when I first started. I didn't call for lasers getting nerfed. When MDs were tearing up the place, I didn't complain then.
So I suggest you do what I did, fight your hardest to not get in the sights and fight those users. It's called taking a punch and throwing back one. If your brain keeps thinking about the punch to your jaw, you will amplify the damage that isn't as bad as your brain inclines it to be. Which also takes away from your power when you punch back.
Grow a pair
Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu.
For the State!!
[email protected]
|
Michael Arck
Onuoto Uakan Huogaatsu
2805
|
Posted - 2014.01.25 00:34:00 -
[4] - Quote
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:Michael Arck wrote:KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:Michael Arck wrote:You put one bad idea into the forums and watch the natives go nuts repeating that bad idea. This is typical in this forum. The tank thread brought about the idea of removing the redline....which is very bad idea by short sighted folks. Let's not forget the AR, that needed a nerf but folks wanted to exclude the fact that there were a less amount of racial weapon variants available at the time, so of course majority of folks had ARs and of course it seemed too lethal when folks been popping its triggers for months on end.
Now its the RR. In which the pattern continues yet again. Over abundance is what drives this. An over abundance of death. An over abundance of its usage. Those two things push the idea that the RR must be nerfed somehow.
Also, people flocking to RR is nothing more than the option in COD that allows you to gain the same weapons as you recent killer. So folks get killed by RR, they run and get the RR. Which furthers pushes the idea to many who fall to it that somehow it needs to be nerfed since, more deaths has come from the RR and more people are learning how to use the rifle.
The question is, if it were the CR, would it happen the same way? More than likely, yes. The problem here is that the community, as stated many times before, don't think objectively when viewing the unique problems. They would have the charge time increased and if so, causes those FOTM users to switch over since its been changed. Then they would probably try the CR and then the CR will become famous. Then the community will cry for the nerf hammers for that as well, without thinking that, hey, plenty deaths and usage doesn't equate to it being nerfed.
The same thing happened with tanks. Tanks on the first day of the changes, were flooding the field. Instead of folks thinking that it will all pass because its the new toys, they cry "Tank 514!!!" from the top of their lungs because of the over abundance of usage and deaths. Tanks are nowhere near the same problem that it once was when the changes came. No one is talking about that though.
This is the never ending facepalming formula that I have experienced on these forums time and time again. It never stops and they never learn. The community, better yet the majority of the community, is hell bent on nerfing anything that kills them too much or is used too much. So essentially, they are wanting to nerf the users of those items. But you can't do that, so you just nerf the weapons that they use in attempt to find something that would give them even ground. Nevermind that skill has nothing to do with this. He killed me with that too many times, that's gotta be nerfed.
This is happened in COD, where dual wielding SMGs were strong and killed many. Same thing with Halo with the battle rifle.
I enjoy coming to the forums, but it boogles me sometimes how people view this game and view what needs to be nerfed or not. If the opinions were objective, then I wouldn't have much to say. But they aren't. You complain about the irrational need to nerf whatever is getting the kills, yet you are being irrational by dismissing the numbers and my analysis based on your own feelings. My argument wasn't "there are too many RRs killing me!", my argument was "if it has more range, it should have less DPS and less close range effectiveness to compensate". You are the one not being objective here. It's obvious my post is saying that I'm tired of hearing these RR nerf necessity threads. I understand what you're saying, I'm not a brain dead mercenary here. Your bandwagon thread lead me to create that long post. Second, the RR is just fine the way it is. Just what is supposed to do in close range? Spray confetti at you with clown horns to boot? DPS? It's a freakin rail rifle with rail technology!! Of course the DPS is going to be pretty big!!! Smh You are being unreasonable, and placing your understanding of lore before balance. You are also wrong about the lore, yes rail tech is supposed to be high damage and high range, but lore does not necessitate that it comes with a high enough rate of fire to match the DPS of close range weapons. Sniper rifle for example is rail tech; has high damage, high range, but its ROF leads it to have low DPS. Consider these options (X remains constant): A) X number DPS B) X number DPS, +30% more range. No one in their right mind would pick option A. Right now the AR is option A, and the RR is option B. Ideally no weapon should be clearly better than another, each should have their own strengths and weaknesses, regardless of lore.
LOL but in another thread, you would state that the weapon must be bound to the lore!!!! C'mon man, are you for real? It sounds like alot of you guys need to toughen up a bit
Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu.
For the State!!
[email protected]
|
Michael Arck
Onuoto Uakan Huogaatsu
2805
|
Posted - 2014.01.25 00:44:00 -
[5] - Quote
axis alpha wrote:I have no got damn reason why you people are complaining about to AR... Just because there's a weapon that can out range the AR? I swear...
I can out gun a rr user on my altar with gek from the AR option range.... You know how? BY STRAFING
Glad to see someone got the brains and the toughness to find ways to succeed. I respect that sir, honestly.
o7
Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu.
For the State!!
[email protected]
|
Michael Arck
Onuoto Uakan Huogaatsu
2811
|
Posted - 2014.01.25 06:40:00 -
[6] - Quote
Justin Tymes wrote:Michael Arck wrote:And just what am I supposed to do when a MD and Laser got sights on me? Please man. I was here on manus peak getting my dropsuit burned to a crisp when I first started. I didn't call for lasers getting nerfed. When MDs were tearing up the place, I didn't complain then.
So I suggest you do what I did, fight your hardest to not get in the sights and fight those users. It's called taking a punch and throwing back one. If your brain keeps thinking about the punch to your jaw, you will amplify the damage that isn't as bad as your brain inclines it to be. Which also takes away from your power when you punch back.
Grow a pair Casually aim and out DPS them? You're beating them with the RR in their optimal, and you **** on them with the RR outside of their optimal. That's not balance. And you do realize that absolutely nothing changed about the MD, in fact it received a nerf because they took the smoke effect away?
"How did I beat you?"
"You're too fast"
"Do you believe me being faster or stronger has anything to do with the muscles in this place?"
"Don't think you are...know you are"
Great conversation between Morpheus and Neo. Morpheus tells him to stop trying to hit him and hit him.
And read the context, smart one. Some guy mentioned the MD. I told him even though it was a nuisance, my mind didn't respond with "oh that's OP, they need to nerf that". No, I didn't give them the pleasure. Instead I searched for ways to beat them.
When I face adversity, I don't cry like the lot does. I won't allow it. I search a way to beat them, because there's always a way.
Seriously, you guys shouldn't even call yourself mercenaries anymore.
Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu.
For the State!!
[email protected]
|
Michael Arck
Onuoto Uakan Huogaatsu
3077
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 02:00:00 -
[7] - Quote
You really can't decide the OPness of a weapon from a pub match perspective. CR is lethal. You don't know that. Go into a more competitive arena...say PC, and you will see the CR rip you to shreds.
Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu.
For the State!!
[email protected]
|
Michael Arck
Onuoto Uakan Huogaatsu
3077
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 02:11:00 -
[8] - Quote
But that doesn't prove the RR is OP, it just says the players were dumb.
So no one decide to spawn at MCC, drop in a DS or LAV, round the enemy taking the long way around and dropping uplinks at two different locations to form a rush pinch move?
There's plenty of cover in the maps...just a small molehill and a crouch can give you enough time to shake these ups on the attacker.
Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu.
For the State!!
[email protected]
|
Michael Arck
Onuoto Uakan Huogaatsu
3077
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 02:34:00 -
[9] - Quote
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:Michael Arck wrote:You really can't decide the OPness of a weapon from a pub match perspective. CR is lethal. You don't know that. Go into a more competitive arena...say PC, and you will see the CR rip you to shreds. I'm not deciding its OP based on my experiences in a pub match today, I decided its OP while making the thread by comparing stats and weighing pros and cons. Kind of convenient that only those who play PC can decide what's OP 
You putting words in my mouth. But let me explain to keep you from making further assumptions and guess on what I'm implying.
I'm not saying that PC is the only place that can decide what's OP or not. I didn't even say that, you assumed that. I say two things. First, I say pub matches are not a good base to decide them on. Pub matches are pub matches. They are not that competitive for one. The majority of players does that COD perk(forget name) in Dust. Meaning, they will see what they got killed with several times in a row and spec into it after match. Which unfortunately causes a viral reaction to many players who follow the same route.
The second states that in more competitive arenas where the battles are hard fought, folks don't use the RR and slaughter with the CR. This does not state that PC is better grounds to decide the nerfs and buffs on.
The latter is quite interesting because coming to the forums, you would think that RR is trump. But players who are without the narrow vision can see that SCR and CR are more of problem than the RR.
So basically, I find it interesting if we look at the ENTIRE data block instead of just judging from public matches and looking at its stats. Cause in action, and in different circumstances, the RR wouldn't be trump.
Just like when folks talk about protostomping. Nothing is mentioned but this happens in Ambush more than any other game modes. Yet, to a new onlooker, you would think prototypes are running wild in all game modes. Yet the person who made the post only judged from his immediate, being that the only game mode he mostly plays is Ambush. So he really has no sense of the game as a whole since he's only judging from that game mode's perspective. Put him in Skirm/Dom, he wouldn't say the same.
That's what I'm talking about here. Having the WHOLE data, not just basing it on what has been experienced in pubs. Especially since there has been mercs who have stated that in PC, the RR isn't even king or instances where mercs where destroyed by CR users(me being a victim, several times) and they had RR in their hands.
If the RR is easymode, then how come they couldn't beat the CR user? You cannot come to a conclusive statement without having all the data. You not having all the data continues to skew the viewpoint of players who have no knowledge base to judge from. So when they do play and get killed twice by the RR, they instantly say, "he's right! The RR is OP!"
So wrong and why changes voiced by the community is often met with scrutiny.
Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu.
For the State!!
[email protected]
|
Michael Arck
Onuoto Uakan Huogaatsu
3077
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 02:35:00 -
[10] - Quote
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:HYENAKILLER X wrote:So what. I kill tons of rr users. S h I t I kill these rr guys with breach ar.
Rail rifle is only range.
Oh, so you killed RR users, guess that proves they aren't OP. I killed some dumbfire swarm launcher users back in the closed beta replication build, guess that means they weren't actually OP. I'm just going to get off the forums and watch something on Netflix now.
That's the problem with this discussion. When more data comes into play, you refute it. Instead of considering the data, if it doesn't sound like its on your bandwagon, you don't want to talk about it. You view it negatively.
But yet you want to have changes done that involves affecting the community but you don't want to hear their difference of opinion, from the community?
Smh.
Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu.
For the State!!
[email protected]
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|