|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Breakin Stuff
Goonfeet
Special Planetary Emergency Response Group
7678
   |
Posted - 2015.03.20 10:10:00 -
[1] - Quote
Sigourney Reever wrote:https://youtu.be/x_RgGJpoUeg?t=18m22s
Rattati asked this question at Fanfest 2015:
How can we strengthen the EVE lore connection without enforcing 1 to 1 relationships?
go for it!
1 to 1 relationships as in 1 player = 1 player?
If that's the case keep the strong asymmetric balance in the game without allowing a single player to be immune utterly to another lone player.
Example: HAVs. Let's face it, a tank being the optimal solution in most cases to another tank is fine. Rendering that tank singularly immune to a single AV gunner, however is problematic.
But the tank should still be the most efficient option.
The problem a lot of things have is a perception that DUST should conform to weak asymmetric balance like in team fortress 2 rather than strong asymmetry where each person brings distinct and solidly different advantages to the field.
New Eden isn't about fair. It's not about equality. But due to the limits of the game, and the fact that I cannot counter a 20-strong armor advance by being a bastard and deploying 230 militia AV guns the 1v1 equation avabsolutely must have some validity.
That validity need not apply equally universally.
Circumstances should change1 player to 1 player relationship positively or negatively but we cannot eliminate it.
It's kinda like sentinels with HMGs. The asymmetry is very strong. Unfortunately that strength marginalizes other options in almost all situations just because of the circumstances in the game.
The 1v1 relationship is almost never there unless you are also in a sentinel in close.
If we clearly define roles where the suits are intended to excel then we can aavoid 1v1 universal purity. But if we do that, then the roles and number of suits must expand to accommodate the need for flexibility.
It can be done. It just has to bring a lot more into play than we have.
AV
|
Breakin Stuff
Goonfeet
Special Planetary Emergency Response Group
7678
|
Posted - 2015.03.20 11:56:00 -
[2] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:My 1v1 comment refers to "if it is in EVE Online we must have it exactly the same following the same rules"
I think we should be inspired but not overruled by EVE.
How can EVE inspire us in a different way then just with modules and rules, and make you think while in game and in MQ, "this is New Eden"
We take a page out of real life.
We recognize that something engineered as a subsystem on board a ship cannot automatically mean it makes sense or works well on a tank or a vehicle. It usually is poorly suited to infantry.
Borrowing things that fit the setting ( module layouts) which make sense and allow for player freedom should be preserved.
Because the core mechanics of DUST and EVE are fundamentally different, we cannot balance things the same way. TThe movement is different, shooting is different, scaling is completely different.
In EVE you can have a 1v1 firefight that is engaging, meaningful and fun. IN DUST if a fight goes on for longer than 20 seconds 1v1 because of the balanceing it becomes a chore.
If something from EVE adds to, and makes the game more engaging and entertaining? Absolutely. Pop that thing right in.
But if it doesn't add to the FPS experience and core gameplay? If it creates an inherent imbalance then it needs a pass or it needs to be altered to fit.
A lot of the clashes I see are between the camps where TF2 asymmetry is the norm, and EVE players who are used to extremes of gameplay from minute to minute.
The TF2 camp thinks sentinels should be more like the heavy in TF2. EVE players tent to equate heavies to battleships and tanks to caps or whatever fits their viewpoint.
Both sides think that balance should follow suit According to these differing viewpoints. But there needs to be a middle ground wwhere we recognize that these are not EVE ships and we are not playing TF2.
DUST/Legion/insertgamehere cannot follow in lockstep with any other game and still be distinct.
Borrowing concepts that work on both sides is great. Slavishly adhering to another game's balance meta is just going to give us all a collective migraine. Because EVE players by and large get pissed off and bored with TF2 or COD style balance but by the same token regular FPS players don't have that intuitive understanding of how the systems work.
Mapping out a middle ground and a solid role T.O.&E. That assigns primary roles (bonusing) to different suit/vehicle classes but not completely restricting them TO said roles can go a long way in helping the dilemma.
Alright that's my noisy and hopefully constructive two cents. Hope it helps.
AV
|
Breakin Stuff
Goonfeet
Special Planetary Emergency Response Group
7682
|
Posted - 2015.03.20 14:39:00 -
[3] - Quote
steadyhand amarr wrote:
Hell even select certain players to play as bad guys
I volunteer.
It's going to happen anyway the instant I can figure out how to antagonize lots of people via gameplay.
It's been a long time since I have had an opportunity with a reasonable chance of success.
AV
|
Breakin Stuff
Goonfeet
Special Planetary Emergency Response Group
7683
|
Posted - 2015.03.20 16:16:00 -
[4] - Quote
Himiko Kuronaga wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:My 1v1 comment refers to "if it is in EVE Online we must have it exactly the same following the same rules"
I think we should be inspired but not overruled by EVE.
How can EVE inspire us in a different way then just with modules and rules, and make you think while in game and in MQ, "this is New Eden" 2009, Rattati. 2009. Look back. Study. Re-forge the hook that your predecessors used, and succeed where they failed. If you have the time, please go through and watch this old presentation. Watch the old incarna bits. Watch the old Dust bits. Look at the stuff that just seemed right, and ask yourself why it hasn't happened. Proper warbarge/station environments are the biggest step forward. It is where EVE failed us the hardest. Rattati you succeeded where an entire team before you failed for balance. Succeed in immersion and win everything forever. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNhPig8inEY
Good core gameplay is more valuable than any social areas could ever be.
Walking in stations should be low priority against improving actually playing the game.
AV
|
Breakin Stuff
Goonfeet
Special Planetary Emergency Response Group
7691
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 04:32:00 -
[5] - Quote
The best way I can think of is to make an emulation software package which allows DUST to run on the PC and PS4. This would allow additions to the game normally untenable while other options are explored.
It wouldn't necessarily improve the PS3 game but it would allow PS3 players to migrate off the aging platform into a system that is able to expand in the way CCP WANTED IT TO or into an expanded game.
Moving some features that cannot be populated on the PS3 (access to the EVE market) to a mobile app, for instance, couls spread the load until everyone has had a year to migrate their clients.
The idea of a "codec" would be a temporary solution, obviously, because it is clunky and unreliable, but it provides an outlet until CCP is able to deliver a more permanent solution.
If this codec is built specifically for DUST, and is built around the Frankenstein engine it wouldn't necessarily represent a viable option for hacking PS3 regular games out for unintended use.
But in order for DUST to meaningfully be able to encorporate more "new eden" to encompass more options and maybe intro full PvE and exploration, to step out of the lobby and into the universe? In order to be able to stop using bandaids that no one is satisfied with?
I am not stupid enough to believe the stopgap measures substituting for solutions in DUST please the devs anymore than they please the playerbase. But we need a better platform setup to make DUST a smooth and engaging experience.
We should begin the process now.
An emulation setup would also sllow CCP to keep their connection through the PSN and keep their AUR sales agreements honored.
I realize this is not as simple as I make it sound per se.
But it would go deep into adding the ABILITY to expand new eden into DUST 514 in more than just racial doctrines and look/feel.
You don't need a 1 to 1 ratio when you have the ability to make the look and feel, the reality match the vision.
We can't get that in the lobby.
AV
|
Breakin Stuff
Goonfeet
Special Planetary Emergency Response Group
7692
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 09:48:00 -
[6] - Quote
There is literally mountains of ways to increase New Eden immersion.
Unfortunately most of them require game additions and overhauls that have either been problematic or have proven impossible on the PS3.
Like adding more weapons. It adds yet more sh*t that the database system has to page through and front-load to matches despite the fact that we need them.
The more fittings and variables that have to be loaded the more performance suffers.
It's obstacles like this that I wish players were more aware of. It's like the lock warning for dropships thing. Most players are still unaware that this was tested and went rather disastrously.
Knowing where the system's ability to handle modifications to the client and page from the server would be IMMENSELY helpful when providing input and ideas for integration of more neat new eden things.
AV
|
Breakin Stuff
Goonfeet
Special Planetary Emergency Response Group
7695
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 13:11:00 -
[7] - Quote
Iron Wolf Saber wrote:As mentioned before correcting the names of the caldari vehicles in question.
Also EWAR
Until scanning/hiding is unscrewed completely there's no justification for trying to add EWAR to the mix.
AV
|
Breakin Stuff
Goonfeet
Special Planetary Emergency Response Group
7697
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 16:08:00 -
[8] - Quote
Vell0cet wrote:
I think this simplification would actually increase revenue to CCP.
I think there's quite a few ways to skin this cat. Most of them will require an actual market where scamming is harder than the "send amount to" simple trading will allow for.
But there's a few others.
AV
|
|
|
| |
|