DUST Search - Sticky:[Data Insights] Rifles and Balancing Methodology

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Sticky:[Data Insights] Rifles and Balancing Methodology

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 9 post(s)
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 1478	Posted - 2014.10.29 14:24:00 - [1] - Quote So what I'm seeing here, is that the rifle was roughly balanced and you decided to hit it with a harsh nerf anyways, because you didn't like the fact that it was being used in a game where the map design accommodates two things - long range poking or short-ish range brawling. Range is king in shooters and always has been unless map design puts you in knife-fights all the time. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 1479	Posted - 2014.10.29 14:41:00 - [2] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: It doesn't really matter though, no single rifle should be doing 50% of all Rifle kills. We could also just have nerfed damage until it was not as extremely good at all ranges, hurting the weapons primary function. I believe that if your game is designed in such a manner that one weapon is clearly the best suited to fighting at the most common engagement range, it should indeed be grabbing 50% of all kills. I am more than willing to agree that rail rifle prevalence was disproportionate and that part of the issue with it was that it performed equally across all races of suit. However these are not problems with the rail rifle in and of itself, but problems with overall game design. Can you provide data for how many kills rail rifles were getting 'per spawn' at ranges under 30m, compared to other weapons? Because it doesn't seem like the data you have supports the nerf that was made. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 1479	Posted - 2014.10.29 16:26:00 - [3] - Quote ^Completely serious. There hasn't been any data provided that suggests that the RR was overperforming in CQC or that it was even getting a much much higher KDR than other weapons. Just a lot of data that says "people like using it". Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 1479	Posted - 2014.10.29 16:41:00 - [4] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: MINA Longstrike wrote: ^Completely serious. There hasn't been any data provided that suggests that the RR was overperforming in CQC or that it was even getting a much much higher KDR than other weapons. Just a lot of data that says "people like using it". lol, if it wasn't being used in CQC, why does an exclusive CQC nerf bother you, ADS wasn't touched. Because it paints it into a corner like the laser rifle, you are turning a racial servicemans weapon (a weapon that should be functional across all ranges) into a specialist weapon (like the laser or massdriver or PLC). You are dramatically and arbitrarily limiting a weapons ability to play the objective in skirmish or domination style matches, simply because it is 'used' more frequently than you think it should be. I'd still like to see data provided for KDA's at various ranges, if you actually have such information. I'll point you towards Jasyn Larrisen's posts because he's better at expressing the underpinning issues of this. There are so many better ways that you could have done this Rattati. I'm not saying that the weapon didn't need to be tweaked or that I want it completely undone - I'm saying that what was done is overdone. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 1479	Posted - 2014.10.29 17:14:00 - [5] - Quote Boot Booter wrote: Let me just stop you there. "Because it paints it into a corner like the laser rifle, you are turning a racial servicemans weapon (a weapon that should be functional across all ranges)" Using this philosophy the rail rifle would function over the largest range compared to other rifles simply because it has a greater optimal range. Essentially saying anyone who uses the rail rifle gets to enjoy more functional range compared to other rifles. This was balanced initially through dps vs range however data shows that the rail rifle was still overperforming despite falling in line with the dps vs range equation. This essentially pointed to the fact that it was too easy to use. Following, to keep the weapon in line with lore, Rattati reduced it's CQC effectiveness. Other options could have been reduced dps, reduced ads effectiveness, etc. Be happy with what you got. I would have happily taken reduced DPS. I think that there's a lot of problems with the DPS vs Range scale. To change the direction of this discussion a little bit I think that due to the way this game has been designed, the rail rifle comes out as the clear option for anything that isn't 'short range' partially because it performs equally across all suits (unlike the scrambler rifle which should be the true top performer). If you look at a map like spine crescent a rail rifle user standing on either end of the bridge can still be in effective cover yet fire at the other end of the bridge or at the closest socket to them while most people who want to shoot at them have to close pretty big open stretches of ground. Other weapons can't do this - this points mostly to an issue with map design as most of the 'engagement' ranges in this game are suited well towards the rail rifle. Anything that ISNT suited to the rail rifle like the inner sockets of iron delta ends up being the playground of the HMG. The problem was never with the rail rifles CQC, but its range and the common engagement ranges of this game. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 1479	Posted - 2014.10.29 17:24:00 - [6] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Just like the AR is painted into a corner by having very short range? Arbitrarily? It means "based solely on one's opinion", does this seem a very arbitrary process? "Used" more? No, it kills more. The Chart shows Kills, not Spawns. I've also strongly felt that the AR should have more range because it's currently stuck in the same playground as the HMG I have spoke openly about this whenever the idea of range as a gallente assault bonus has come up. The AR needs more range on just the base rifle. The chart has missed the key point of data that I've been asking for and that is what range are these kills occurring at. I'm fairly confident that you will see that most of the RR's kills happening at about 45-75m. It really seems like there are two options - Rail rifle for long ranges because standoff engagements can be forced, or HMG for short range because almost no other weapon can compare to its dps. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 1480	Posted - 2014.10.29 17:58:00 - [7] - Quote Gabriella Grey wrote: f that is done you are ignoring Laser weapons completely. We are trying to balance the game not keep the status quo of unbalance. Cant properly balance something that has a grand total of 2 weapons. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 1480	Posted - 2014.10.29 18:22:00 - [8] - Quote There's a strong difference between performing well and being able to perform at all. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 1493	Posted - 2014.10.31 16:08:00 - [9] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: My favorite post of the year Lots of people like numbers. I'm one of them, just not nearly as handy at graphs / excel. Thank you though for being willing to reduce the kick on rail rifles. I'd still like to see the metric for what range kills are happening at though because I think that's the largest issue with RR's. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.