MarasdF Loron
fatal absolution
Bleeding Sun Conglomerate
1148
   |
Posted - 2017.05.16 16:16:00 -
[1] - Quote
Joel II X wrote:It'll certainly hurt racial diversify, that's for sure. As a tradeoff, it'll be easier to balance between classes, maybe. Reason for this having all of one class have different slot layouts, but all the same Power Core (PC) meter.
For argument's sake, let's compare Caldari and Gallente Assaults. Caldari favor shields, tanking, and ECM (jamming) for EWAR. The Gallente favor Repair, light armor tanking, and RSD (dampening-ish). Both very different, right? Now, let's give the Calass a 4/2 and Galass 2/4, but both have the same PC (for balancing). Because they have the same limitations, both should be able to do what the other one could. Dual tanking is one of these problems, but because they have different slots, the degrees at which one can do the other varies.
If they keep the CPU/PG mechanic, you can encourage players to play to their race's strengths. Give Caldari a high CPU count and low-mid PG count, while the Gallente has mid on both. Give Shield Extenders a high CPU cost with low PG costs, and give Armor Repair low-mid costs on both CPU/PG, while giving Armor Plates low CPU, but high PG.
To balance out the Matari/Amarr, just give the Minnies 3/3 with medium on both, and Amarr 1/5 with low CPU/high PG. this way the Matari can still dual tank as in eve, and the Amarr become the armor tankers like in Eve.
Anywho, you get the point: it allows for a more strategic way of making builds around these limitations. Don't fix it if it ain't broken.
Also, an idea I had some time ago was removing CPU/PG requirements from weapons to simplify the build making while lowering the amounts of CPU/PG of the suits to compensate, I'll leave that for another thread.
This is pretty much how I feel, I think too many games are going for oversimplification these days, it really takes the fun out of the games when your choices get limited not necessarily for balance but for easier to understand mechanics.
Pokey Dravon wrote:In regards to complexity...
One resource pool is very common in games with any sort of loadout system so people will probably grasp that pretty easily. Two fitting resources is really not that much more complicated but it can be confusing if not explained properly, which is why people struggled with it in Dust.
So my question is, was the system itself flawed? Or was the way it was taught to you flawed? I'm kinda feeling it was the second.
So is it worth dropping a lot of fitting depth for the sake of a easier to digest NPE? I don't think so. I'd rather they keep the two resource system and just properly explain it this time.
I started playing Dust in open beta and I hadn't played EVE before Dust and to me the NPE seemed perfectly fine at the time, it took me around 30 mins to get a basic grasp of how things work in Dust, I really though that the tutorial stuff that was in place at the time was informative enough to get you started on your journey of loss, success and most importantly self learning.
After a week of playing I had learned most of the stuff in Dust and then through the years I kept on learning small bits and pieces from time to time and I really liked the fact that there was always something new to learn.
To me it didn't seem like the NPE was flawed, it was the players that didn't bother listening to the tutorials or properly checking different things in the game. It was a problem of CoD generation of players that need their hand being held throughout the whole game, having a tooltip for every single thing in the game.
It's fine if the game has a tootltip controls the first time you are playing the game but it goes way too far if you need the game to tell you that "Hey, did you know that loadouts are there so that you can build your own kind of suit and choose the kind of weapon that you want to use" or that "Skillpoints are there so that you can unlock new stuff with them" or "Money is there so that you can buy new stuff with it" or "Hey, did you know that those letters in the match represent objectives that you can capture" like how retarted are you if you need the game to tell you these things?
Again what is fine is telling you where to access the market, your skilltree or your loadouts.
But I guess this was kind of off topic, altough I think it really is important to take into consideration when thinking about simplification. If you make things complicated then retarted people won't understand how to play the game, but if you make the game too simple then normal people who want variety and complexity from a game will turn away from your game.
|
MarasdF Loron
fatal absolution
Bleeding Sun Conglomerate
1151
|
Posted - 2017.05.18 02:44:00 -
[2] - Quote
DUST Fiend wrote:Alena Asakura wrote:
Capacitors should be used for dropsuits and vehicles alike. It's not whether it's a dropsuit or a vehicle that matters, but what the capacitor is used for which should always be a store of energy to be released in a single charge, for instance, for firing energy weapons.
Im not necessarily arguing for or against the idea, just noting the frustration of having a mechanic pilots asked for for years only just now being considered now that vehicles are no more. I really shouldnt be surpised at this point. It also seems odd for them to say theyre looking to simplify and streamline things like using a single resource while simultaneously considering something that will make noobs rage when they cant track all their resources mid firefight. I guess Im struggling to see what direction NOVA is trying to head in.
Brick wall.
|