I agree on using EVE names for ammo where appropriate. I do not favor being able to live swap in game without the use of a supply depot, but you could have a Commando (are they called Vanguard now?) with two laser rifles, one setup for close quarters and the other setup for long range. Might see more Amarr Commandos/Vanguards around then.

SNIP

Did anyone ever think about unlocking say for example T2 ammunition types or something rather similar for weapons through the proficiency skill rather than having flat damage increases?

I'll try to compose my thoughts on this matter but CCP Rattati did mention that he wanted to introduce modular weapons fittings and such. Perhaps increasing your proficiency opens up the use of these T2 ammunition types which offer only minute differences but are still worth getting if you plan on using weapons in specific ways.

T2 might excel in certain roles light increasing optimal range or modifying a damage profile more significantly but would also come with more notable draw backs for players who use them like increased spool up times, faster heat build up, or slower reloads.

I dig the ammo types, and I also like the variant ammo types for ranger to damage balance. My immediate concern is how this will factor into an FPS shooter environment? In EVE I always have time to evaluate my situation and load the appropriate ammo type before engagement. Will the average NOVA player have that time?

I suppose we could use user-defined command keys or macros, but do you see ammo types being selected pre-deployment as part of your loadout? Unable to change types unless you access some terminal giving you options to change your fittings?

Or do you see this more as a change-on-the-fly option during combat as if you were simply changing primary light weapon to secondary sidearm?

Agreed. As a thought experiment on a feature, try to think of it as if you were designing such a feature. What is the method / functions you could use that would:

1) Require the least amount of new code
2) Be the simplest to write / read / maintain
3) Has the least number of "cases"
4) How could this be expanded upon in the future?

When designing features try to think of something that would have a small number of different cases, as each use case you add inevitably adds edge cases which can be nightmarish to hash out. Ask yourself this: What does this case do to make the user experience more fun / make the backend work better?

Can I add just one thing - NOT using something for a period of time should result in the proficiency dropping. Anything based on practice degenerates with lack of practice. So it should be that if you use something enough to get its proficiency to 5, if you subsequently stop using it as much, your proficiency should drop, similar to something like standings, which can drop if you don't keep at them.

This would make "proficiency" actually mean something.

Unlocking specializations / variants is generally a better way to go about things than use-base power progression, especially if those specializations / variants are more or less "side-grades"

One thing to keep in mind though is that if variants of a weapon differ too greatly from each other, then players may feel they are being forced to play through content they do not wish to so that they can get to content they actually want.

As an example the Scrambler Rifle has a variant weapon in the Assault Scrambler Rifle, but I feel it can be justified in saying that these two weapons do not play quite the same as each other. So then you run into the problem with your unlock method as listed that a player will have to play through the Scrambler Rifle before unlocking the ASR, which may prove to be anti-fun to a player. As a general rule, you want to avoid players feeling like they have to play through undesirable content to get a desired outcome. (As a corollary to this, don't put valuable content behind annoying content because players will still do it, then hate your game) This, in time, can cause player drop off or players not expanding because desired variants are locked behind undesired weapon bases.

Now as a counterpoint you might say that it means we just need to be smarter about which weapons unlock which variants. As you propose above using Assault or Breach or Tactical to unlock variants in the AR, RR, SR etc. This does not eliminate the problem as described above due to the simple assumption that these weapons vary in some meaningful way. (Otherwise why have seperate weapons?) This variance, to player taste, may make one weapon distasteful but another weapon enjoyable even if the weapons were deemed variants of one another. (SR v ASR, or BAR v BRR)

Ideally the unlocked variants are of a more subtle approach than feel of the weapon such as Variant A having More Ammo per clip / Less Ammo total, or Variant B having less PG fitting, but more CPU fitting. These variants allow for tactical flexibility while retaining the core features that drew a player to that weapon type to begin with.

Weapons (including the Assault, Breach, Tactical, Burst variants of them) should be readily available to players without having to first invest in weapons they may not like. Although at the same time, your point remains strong that opening the flood gates from the word "Go" has it's own host of issues and problems.

Did anyone ever think about unlocking say for example T2 ammunition types or something rather similar for weapons through the proficiency skill rather than having flat damage increases?

I'll try to compose my thoughts on this matter but CCP Rattati did mention that he wanted to introduce modular weapons fittings and such. Perhaps increasing your proficiency opens up the use of these T2 ammunition types which offer only minute differences but are still worth getting if you plan on using weapons in specific ways.

T2 might excel in certain roles light increasing optimal range or modifying a damage profile more significantly but would also come with more notable draw backs for players who use them like increased spool up times, faster heat build up, or slower reloads.

Double post..

I agree on using EVE names for ammo where appropriate. I do not favor being able to live swap in game without the use of a supply depot, but you could have a Commando (are they called Vanguard now?) with two laser rifles, one setup for close quarters and the other setup for long range. Might see more Amarr Commandos/Vanguards around then.

Ah... Why not walk with your ammo? Take two ammo types, divide total ammo by two types.

Why do you oppose "live swapping?"

I understand if it's like I have the freedom to reach way out and now I can punish closely without worry

Absolutely rubbish.

Weapons should not do more damage the more you use them, that's just pathetic and one of many reasons why player retention in Dust was so bad.

In one of the interviews Hilmar gave he said he wanted more realism, well guess what, a real gun will do just as much damage if fired by a 4 year old kid or a 40 year old combat veteran.

Novas not even lit and you're already looking at ways to get advantages over new players.

You're a ******* disgrace.

Thems some hellified conclusions yer drawin there. It wasn't weapons profenciencies that had retention low. Had some proper form of player division been in place you would have newbs vs newbs and vets vs vets. In a proper environment, proficiencies work fine. Still there were MANY reasons players didn't stick it out.

No one is looking to create a vet dominance over new players. This thread was an idea of what will probably be of a few hundred before these forums are closed (read: a single, isolated concept based on reasonable assumptions). I personally believe one of those assumptions is that player progression in NOVA is in place and balanced for this proficiency suggestion to have a place to exist to begin with. Even as just a discussion point. I kind of thought that would be a given. Perhaps i expect too much of posters.

Re: your realism reference, our entire species is based on gaining proficiency through repetitive practice. If not to survive, then to get a job. Or a raise in that job. Or a higher grade on a midterm final. Or practicing a guitar to cover a favorite song. And, yes, even in shooting a gun. The entire premise here is of proficiency. Or a high degree of competency or skill; expertise. While a four year old may be able to pull a trigger, the power of that gun has nothing to do with proficiency. The power is the same. The kid going toe to toe with a 40 year old combat sniper veteran will die before he's able to lift the rifle. That's reality. But we're talking about video games. Proficiency in weapon systems has no place in a video game.




Oh. P.S. why so srs?

I agree. I could see it being something more like a swappable mod for the gun rather than something you swap on the fly. Besides, we are all just going to use Antimatter anyways ;)