|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Vell0cet
SVER True Blood General Tso's Alliance
1189
|
Posted - 2014.03.20 21:49:00 -
[1] - Quote
I love Judge's videos. I do think he does a better job of pointing out problems than proposing solutions though. For one thing he seemed to be a big fan of the nerfs to swarms in 1.7 as show in this video of his. In that video he ignores the fact that swarm range isn't a cylinder that extends to the sky, but is a dome. At normal dropship altitudes, the radius of the circle of effective lock-on range is actually much smaller than what he shows. The ability of dropships to quickly buzz in-and-out of lock range before you are able to fire is also an issue, not to mention being able to light an afterburner and speed away from the swarms.
I also think he got the suggested fix wrong with his Redline Rail Tank Video. I think the man focus for fixing that mechanic is changing how the redline works instead of nerfing turret elevation, which would leave dropships with very few viable options to counter them (teams of forge gunners and ramming with cheap dropships). A rail tank with a low turret elevation would be forced to the redlines and edges of the battle to hit anything in the air, which is counterproductive. It should be encouraged to engage closer to the action by adding falloff mechanics and changes to the redline.
One redline change that might work is having it function like the cloak meter or stamina bar. CCP could extend the time in the redline to 40 seconds, but once your time is up and you leave, it slowly builds back up over 40 seconds, in other words, it wouldn't reset back to 40 immediately after exiting. This would limit MCC spawn camping, and open up waves of opportunity for counterattack. Here's an example, you enter the aerial redline for 30 seconds, and then exit. You now have 10 secs of redline time remaining that slowly builds up to 20 over the next 10 seconds. You re-enter the redline with 20 second, spend 15, and now exit with only 5 left. You will have to wait 35 seconds to get it back to full.
Having said all that it would have been interesting to hear what his proposed fixes were. It seems likely they would involve significantly reducing the innate resistance to swarms that vehicles have. It would have been interesting to see how those models change with the innate resistance tweaks.
Best PvE idea ever!
|
Vell0cet
SVER True Blood General Tso's Alliance
1191
|
Posted - 2014.03.20 22:16:00 -
[2] - Quote
Havaru Fox wrote:i think that we are all just humans and after some time he found out that his first thinking was wrong. to the marked part.. if we have suits where you can carry a AA weapon and a light weapon (in caldari case a railrifle and a swarm) then it would fix the problem that you fight with lower numbers if people have to use AV gear. if one tank/dropship forces out 3 AV gears (and you can call in like 4-5 tanks) then there is something wrong. I would also like to see the fighterjets released. for those who never saw them.. here is a youtube vid where you can see that they allready had them done: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ED-YF-v7WCw&feature=player_detailpage#t=339syou can also see the concept art here: http://imgur.com/a/4bKjz#9line3 second picture I actually have more respect for Judge for this. I'd rather someone get it wrong, and then release a revised opinion than pretend like they're infallible.
Best PvE idea ever!
|
Vell0cet
SVER True Blood General Tso's Alliance
1193
|
Posted - 2014.03.20 23:22:00 -
[3] - Quote
CommanderBolt wrote:So us dropship pilots love to complain about rails but to be honest in relation to the python - since the triple hardener meta has surfaced its nearly impossible to kill pythons with anything else BUT a railgun....
CCP ~balance~ for you.
I think they should just make it really simple.
2 options but I prefer A over B personally.
A - All vehicles are really cheap but all die very easily (Similar to battlefield) or B- All vehicles keep there awesome power but their prices goes up really high.
I say just make vehicles something cheap and something more easily killable then how they are now. I'm not saying I want this game to turn into Battlefield 514 but I do think we could definitely take a few of the really great features of BF and adapt them to dust. This is the wrong approach. We should CARE about our vehicles, it should feel like something we own and worked hard for (like in EVE). That doesn't mean it should be godmode though. Someone with a proto swarm fit should also care a lot about their suit too. The way to balance vehicle price is the average ISK value of what they're able to destroy before dying. ISK efficiency should be the metric.
Best PvE idea ever!
|
Vell0cet
SVER True Blood General Tso's Alliance
1207
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 02:18:00 -
[4] - Quote
Disturbingly Bored wrote:Vell0cet wrote:This is the wrong approach. We should CARE about our vehicles, it should feel like something we own and worked hard for (like in EVE). That doesn't mean it should be godmode though. Someone with a proto swarm fit should also care a lot about their suit too. The way to balance vehicle price is the average ISK value of what they're able to destroy before dying. ISK efficiency should be the metric. Balancing by ISK has never worked for EVE nor DUST. It didn't work for heavies in beta, it didn't work for tanks before 1.7, it doesn't work for Titans in EVE or anything else you can possibly bring up. There will always be someone with enough cash to say "lol wtf eva". Though the ISK value of something should make a player care whether they lose it or not, it should not determine the relative balance of something. I agree with CommanderBolt's point A. Vehicles should be powerful against infantry, as they are now, but weak against AV. Vehicles should be a bit more expensive than dropsuits, but not millions of ISK. It should be viable to run tanks or dropships only, lose a couple, and still make a bit of ISK. Rock is tanks, Scissors is Infantry, Paper is AV. Each should be quite effective against the next, but weak against the one that precedes it.That's balanced. There's a big difference between balancing on ISK and balancing on RELATIVE ISK (i.e. ISK efficiency). I agree that vehicles, infantry, and AV should all be balanced on good gameplay. Being able to consistently run something is entirely irrelevant if its ISK efficiency is out-of-whack.
I can't afford to run Proto gear 24/7 and have to grind in cheaper suits to have nice things (note: I'm not complaining, this is a good thing). It gives good suits value and makes me care if I live or die. This is a unique aspect of DUST that makes it more compelling than any other FPS I've ever played. I'm not sure why some vehicle users think they get to be the exception here.
Best PvE idea ever!
|
Vell0cet
SVER True Blood General Tso's Alliance
1208
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 04:14:00 -
[5] - Quote
Maken Tosch wrote:Michael Arck wrote: Before I read your post, just where exactly is the ad hominem? Seriously. That's exactly how it happened.
Let the truth be the truth. Judge was very vocal and happy about the swarm range and damage nerf...now he is all for increasing damage? Why? Because his dropship is getting blown outta the sky now? So he's all for it because it benefits him. Just like he was all for the swarm nerf, since he can camp flight objectives. C'mon now, I'm not even making this up.
Do you even know what an ad hominem is? Anyways, he's not calling for direct buff to swarm damage. He even says to be careful about saying that. He's calling for a rework on how that damage is applied. As far as I can see, the base damage for swarms seems fine. The problem is how the system applies that damage. This shouldn't be too hard to understand as the evidence that backs up his point is evidently clear. But you seem to ignore that in this discussion and thus resort to an ad hominem by saying "oh he's just a butthurt DS pilot mad at tanks" which is NOT related to this discussion. This discussion is about the application of AV swarm damage and nothing more. Also, as the video clearly shows, he puts a lot of focus on AV swarms which look like absolute **** when pitted against dropships. Judge seems to want the AV swarms to be as equally affective against his own dropship as they are against other vehicles. I agree. I'm pretty sure that Judge is sincere in wanting balance. I suspect in his first swarm video, he was simply wrong about the implications (also if he had known about all of the secret resistances and such he discusses in this new video, I suspect he might have had a different opinion). IMO Judge is also wrong about how to fix rail tanks too, but I don't think he wants to deliberately break the game to benefit his preferred play style. He seems like a guy putting a lot of time and effort into pointing out problems related to vehicles because he wants them to be balanced. This game will never succeed if things continue to be as imbalanced as they are, surely Judge knows this.
This was an incredibly well-done video that really shines a light on the problems with built-in resistances and the imbalances that exist. I don't see how anyone could watch it and come away thinking otherwise.
Best PvE idea ever!
|
Vell0cet
SVER True Blood General Tso's Alliance
1210
|
Posted - 2014.03.21 13:59:00 -
[6] - Quote
andoori kaldrojian wrote:I hope CCP watch the youtube vid.
The only reason I can see for them not to act on this is money. i.e. they make a shed load of dosh from aurum tanks(does CCP have shareholders?). Can't see any other reason for this not to be fixed. CCP isn't stupid. They know they'll make a LOT more money by having a fun, balanced game and growing the playerbase over time. If they don't act it will be because the fix may require changes to the code that won't be hot fixable, and they may be waiting on a big fanfest release. I think they need a 1.9 April release with just balance changes.
Best PvE idea ever!
|
Vell0cet
SVER True Blood General Tso's Alliance
1214
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 13:44:00 -
[7] - Quote
Lorhak Gannarsein wrote:While I in no way disagree with his conclusions, I do think he might have been more meticulous in his live testing. It seems a bit off that he's showing us during a battlefield scenario; there are all sorts of variables that must be taken into account when doing something like that. I saw a few swarm missiles impact on terrain at several points in the video, for example. I would have hoped that he'd organised a squad or two to run through it with him; it'd have taken no more than four people, all of whom could even have been pilots, and his live results would have been much more controlled.
As it is, the video is essentially 21 minutes of spectacle with a few graphs being the only important things there. Uh... He was being shot at by tanks and dropships, that makes it hard to be "meticulous." I thought he did a pretty damn good job given the circumstances.
Best PvE idea ever!
|
Vell0cet
SVER True Blood General Tso's Alliance
1214
|
Posted - 2014.03.22 17:10:00 -
[8] - Quote
Judge Rhadamanthus wrote:Lorhak Gannarsein wrote:........I do think he might have been more meticulous in his live testing. It seems a bit off that he's showing us during a battlefield scenario; there are all sorts of variables that must be taken into account when doing something like that. I saw a few swarm missiles impact on terrain at several points in the video, for example...... As it is, the video is essentially 21 minutes of spectacle with a few graphs being the only important things there. This is a video about the issues. This is in no way the sum total of my testing nor representative of how I gather all my data. It does however form part of the testing. If a control test shows swarms can kill an ADS in 10 hits for example but in no real battle is it possible to ever land 10 hits then the control test does not represent anything other than raw numbers. Many people need to see it rather than just look at a chart that says it. A chart can be dismissed more easily then watching 3 of us trying to take on a vehicle can. You need both control battle tests and "in the wild" battle data, These are also useless without a data model. to look for anomalies and run many scenarios. Also who wants to watch 20 minutes of me standing in a corner shooting 11 different builds of a swarm launcher into an ads..Then again into a tank...then a LAV? Thanks for the videos Judge. I know you were reluctant to discuss possible solutions in the clip, but how about doing so here. Did you play with the models and come up with some numbers that could work better?
Best PvE idea ever!
|
|
|
|