DUST Search - Why was Metalevel lockout not put in release 1.2

deezy dabest wrote:

JARREL THOMAS wrote:

Then why not try it if they will be fine? It'll level out the battlefield for the new players (if they're good).

.
.
.
.

deezy dabest wrote:

My militia beats that newbies militia because my core skills and weapon skills are all maxed out. New players still get stomped.

The player base very very RARELY gets over 3000 people online at one time. That's not a lot to divide from and search times already blow.

Tanks would be epic over powered with a proper fit in a meta locked match. There are currently some tank fits that require 4 - 5 full proto A/V players to take them down. What happens when not even those people can go proto? I will give you a hint TANKS WIN.

Finally, the most damning point, payouts are based on ISK lost. If you remove all high level gear from matches payouts go from seriously bad to incredibly worse.

Basically the idea of meta lockouts was a purely knee jerk reaction which did not hold up to the slightest amount of scrutiny. There is not one single good aspect that comes from it.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
One Eyed King Nos Nothi 13	Posted - 2015.12.24 21:15:00 - [1] - Quote Mobius Wyvern wrote: Because it won't do anything. Most of the people using that stuff are more than good enough to beat the **** out of you without it. It's not as much of a crutch as people seem to think. I've used plenty of Darth's scrambler rifles and I never wreck people because I'm not that good at shooters. You have to have the guns AND be good with them. Locking out the guns themselves won't do anything. Then why not just use the meta lock and be done with it. One less thing to worry about. I think that skill is a large factor, but the compounding advantages increased fitting capacity gives with regards to HP, DPS, EWAR, Speed, BW etc results in an overly large hurdle. If people can be that good in small squads with lower tier gear, then they should be willing to have meta locks and prove it. If no differences are seen, they can remove meta locks with confidence. Former CEO of the Land of the BIind. Any double entendre is unintended I assure you.
One Eyed King Nos Nothi 13	Posted - 2015.12.28 17:42:00 - [2] - Quote deezy dabest wrote: JARREL THOMAS wrote: Then why not try it if they will be fine? It'll level out the battlefield for the new players (if they're good). . . . . deezy dabest wrote: My militia beats that newbies militia because my core skills and weapon skills are all maxed out. New players still get stomped. The player base very very RARELY gets over 3000 people online at one time. That's not a lot to divide from and search times already blow. Tanks would be epic over powered with a proper fit in a meta locked match. There are currently some tank fits that require 4 - 5 full proto A/V players to take them down. What happens when not even those people can go proto? I will give you a hint TANKS WIN. Finally, the most damning point, payouts are based on ISK lost. If you remove all high level gear from matches payouts go from seriously bad to incredibly worse. Basically the idea of meta lockouts was a purely knee jerk reaction which did not hold up to the slightest amount of scrutiny. There is not one single good aspect that comes from it. If you have more skills, then why worry about meta locks? If your std/militia can beat theirs, then your pro/officer can REALLY beat theirs, while ensuring you have an even greater advantage and that even the mere possibility some noob could even accidentally kill you despite their lower skill is decreased to near impossibility. Look, we get it from your videos (unless I am confusing you with someone else, then my pardons), you like destroying new players. You get off on it. Good for you. I don't care if you and your like quit if it means new players have a little more of a chance, and retention rates increase. Hell, I bet you would see a lot of people return as a result. And if the data doesn't show any increase? Locks can be removed. We have nothing to lose at this juncture. Former CEO of the Land of the BIind. Any double entendre is unintended I assure you.
One Eyed King Nos Nothi 13	Posted - 2015.12.28 20:36:00 - [3] - Quote deezy dabest wrote: I am not pointing to my skills, I consider myself as having very mediocre gun game at the end of the day. I am simply pointing out the difference in core skills. Yes, you are confusing me with every single other person that has made videos. While every single youtuber runs officer non stop you will find that I run almost completely unmodified APEX fittings unless the other team is attempting to proto stomp. I take a bit of offense at being lumped with the actual proto stompers but I understand why my argument against meta locks would cause that. I'm not sure if you have noticed but CCP is not one for going back on things. That would seriously fuel the argument that we are just beta testers and lead to more talking down about CCP. At the end of the day meta locks are just another classic band aid that will do absolutely nothing but damage to the game. I already amended the quote after not finding the evidence and apologize for jumping to conclusions. That said, CCP has backed off things numerous times. Just look at the cloak. It had 25% dampening and twice the duration when it first released. And that doesn't even count the other nerfs like blindness. Then there is backpedaling, which was originally in gamme at 50% of forward movement and was removed. Now it is back at a respectable 80% or so. This is CCPs first FPS, and there was bound to be trial and error. No game is perfect, and all sorts of companies make changes. Even the ones like Bungie and Dice that have made these games for years. I disagree that it will damage the game. And we are already in a state where band aids are fixing old code because there is no other way. They nerfed EWAR because they couldn't remove shared passive scans. They created the skins and half tiercide because of the amount of resources the old code used. They introduced BW because of the resources EQ uses. At this point it is making the best of a bad situation, and helping the game survive long enough to show that porting is viable or that they can financially commit more resources. In order to do that, we need new players, and better retention. Meta locks in pubs are the best solution at this point. Former CEO of the Land of the BIind. Any double entendre is unintended I assure you.
One Eyed King Nos Nothi 13	Posted - 2015.12.28 21:21:00 - [4] - Quote You are right that risk/reward is off. That is one reason there is so much stomping. I have always advocated for a more robust system for rewards, and have seen many others do the same. I can't remember any of it getting a response from CCP. Meta locks on the other hand have been discussed by them to my recollection. Or at least acknowledged. I was hoping squad number changes would have been the answer, and was not behind meta locks until then. Now there is little choice. Former CEO of the Land of the BIind. Any double entendre is unintended I assure you.
One Eyed King Nos Nothi 13	Posted - 2015.12.28 21:49:00 - [5] - Quote deezy dabest wrote: One Eyed King wrote: You are right that risk/reward is off. That is one reason there is so much stomping. I have always advocated for a more robust system for rewards, and have seen many others do the same. I can't remember any of it getting a response from CCP. Meta locks on the other hand have been discussed by them to my recollection. Or at least acknowledged. I was hoping squad number changes would have been the answer, and was not behind meta locks until then. Now there is little choice. Nothing in this game will ever be right without an incentive to win. Having one side give up as soon as they know winning will result in negative ISK leads to skewed stats. Skewed stats leaves nothing to reliably match make or balance based on. You are correct that meta locks were mentioned by Rattati but like I said above it was a knee jerk reaction to appease the community which simply did not stand up to scrutiny. It is not the lack of incentive to win that is the problem. It is that winning, and winning big, is nearly the only way to make money. Incentives are needed to stay in a fight even if its likely you will lose. Those aren't there, and it is why so many leave battles. This leads to squads of people in OP gear to ensure victory, and leaving when games seem lost, with a bunch of others sticking around once their team's proto squads are gone. Now they are outnumbered and out geared. Meta locks will mean less risk of loss for those in pubs, and as a result more incentive to stay for the fun. If anything, it will give new and random mercs the ability to fight back some without being so heavily outclassed. There also needs to be incentives for new players to stick out the grind and learn the game. Getting constantly stomped by people they are out playing yet seem to make no damage and die quickly is poor incentive to stick around. They need to at least get the occasional kill, and can't do that when they are up against players with more HP and DPS. Make no mistake, we could already be well past the point of no return regarding player numbers and good games. Well past appropriate risk/reward adjustment and meta locks. The biggest loss to me has been the fun of close games. You can try and pay mercs for winning and even losing, but no amount of imaginary money can force people to stick around and play a game that isn't fun. The gear imbalance is a big factor in the new player vs vet gap, and is a big part in the lack of competitive and fun games. I say put meta locks in pubs and lets have fun again. If people want to use their pricey gear, they can play FW and PC. Former CEO of the Land of the BIind. Any double entendre is unintended I assure you.
One Eyed King Nos Nothi 13	Posted - 2015.12.28 22:37:00 - [6] - Quote Pope Chester wrote: The cost of the suits does a fine job of keeping balance. Ccp needs to open the entire dust market place to free trade. Let the invisible hand do the work. This would be a massive under taking, and beyond what resources CCP has for Dust. Former CEO of the Land of the BIind. Any double entendre is unintended I assure you.