Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
TabbieKat
72
|
Posted - 2012.07.09 04:23:00 -
[1] - Quote
Dust is looking like it is coming out well and well i do know that a lot of stuff will be fixed in the coming weeks and months before it is released to the general public. My reason for this post is to try to get the gimmicky players to stop before stuff gets nurfed. Valid tactics and strategies are going to be lost because you use Remote Explosives as grenades. I mean come on, when have you EVER seen a solider throw a block of C-4 at someone and then detonate it. Using it in a spawn point to kill people as they come in is a good way to use it. Annoying but it is being used correctly. I also know if friendly fire is introduced Remote explosives used as grenades will decline, but in the mean time they will get nurfed and will not be worth it.
Dropship pilots.... DO YOUR JOB. Your job is not to fly around and look for people to squash and your job is not to set up on a tower or building and fire down. You are suppose to pick people up and drop them off and also provide air support though flying around with your gunners. I am not saying do not squish people, that is another valid tactic but looking around for people to squish will get annoying enough that like Remote Explosives it will get nerfed. If you want to be an army of one either get a heavy suit with a HMG or a Forge gun and have at it. You are just wasting everyone else's time looking for people to squish.
I can already see the "QQ more" and the like posts but I am trying to keep things that work from being nufed, and when they do, only you Gimmicky players are to blame. Stop using the low kick button long enough to learn how to play the game and things will be better, this is not live this is BETA play in other ways then the easy way to find stuff wrong with the game that needs to be fixed. |
onlyelisha
Algintal Core Gallente Federation
86
|
Posted - 2012.07.09 04:32:00 -
[2] - Quote
Pretty much agree with everything except this
TabbieKat wrote:a heavy suit with a HMG.
Kind of hard to be a one man army with a HMG. Scrambler pistol or assualt rifle maybe, but the HMG nah.
|
TabbieKat
72
|
Posted - 2012.07.09 07:39:00 -
[3] - Quote
LOL right but i was just giving an example i do not want to see things get nurfed because some tool wanted easy mode. most good attacks and strategies get nurfed in most MMO's because of these tools.
In Planetside there was a tank called the Magrider Tank. It was a hover tank that got the nick name "The Lawnmower" for good reason. People got really good a mowing down infantry and not learning to use it. Well it got to the point where if you saw one and you were infantry you just let them kill you. Well after a lot of belly aching from the people getting "mowed down" they drastically reduced the damage it did when it hit you. It went from it hits you you are dead to they have to back over your three of four times to kill you. A good tactic was nurfed because people over used it. I foresee this happening to the drop ships in order to force them to be used properly. I do not want to see this happen so please if you see a dropship only, and i repeat ONLY squishing people please tell them to stop so this will not be nurfed. |
Seeker of Cheese
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
163
|
Posted - 2012.07.09 10:51:00 -
[4] - Quote
There's a quick test for tactics: Did it work? Then it's the correct way to use it. |
Seran Jinkar
Sanmatar Kelkoons Minmatar Republic
214
|
Posted - 2012.07.09 11:02:00 -
[5] - Quote
Well I'd say that the squasch damage will stay the same, but the damage to the vehicle on impact will be increased. That would increase the demand on flight skill and keep the dropships in the sky. |
zekina zek
D3LTA FORC3 Orion Empire
108
|
Posted - 2012.07.09 11:09:00 -
[6] - Quote
TabbieKat wrote:Dropship pilots.... DO YOUR JOB. Your job is to fly around and look for people to squash and your job is to set up on a tower or building and fire down.
|
zekina zek
D3LTA FORC3 Orion Empire
108
|
Posted - 2012.07.09 11:13:00 -
[7] - Quote
how much time have you spent flying a dropship?
and how much of that time did you have gunners?
i squish the hell out of the other team so my team realizes that they need to get in my gun seats because i am an impressive pilot. once i have a gunner, or two, i dont squish(as much )
|
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
1849
|
Posted - 2012.07.09 12:12:00 -
[8] - Quote
I don't have a problem with Dropships trying to squish me.
If they aren't better at the game than me, they usually die first. If they are, they deserved the kill (and I still usually leave them hurting). And if they're tower-camping, my Swarm Launcher is better at killing them than they are at hitting anywhere near me. |
Zach Shanna
Algintal Core Gallente Federation
77
|
Posted - 2012.07.09 12:17:00 -
[9] - Quote
TabbieKat wrote: Dropship pilots.... DO YOUR JOB. Your job is not to fly around and look for people to squash and your job is not to set up on a tower or building and fire down. You are suppose to pick people up and drop them off and also provide air support though flying around with your gunners.
Have you tried getting SP as a dropship pilot? It's impossible as nobody guns for you so that what people resort to |
Corban Lahnder
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
158
|
Posted - 2012.07.09 14:06:00 -
[10] - Quote
Squishing always exposes drop ships to alot of fire So I have viewed it as a valid risk reward trade off.
the tower thing is getting ludcirous though. Either they need to adjust the flight cieling of the drop ships, increase the inacuracy of launchers at extreme long range, or just limit there range, also with the safe unsafe zones they could use that to imply a flight cieling for zones.
Moral of the story is theres lots of mechanics to end tower sniping and the game was a lot more fun and balanced with out it. |
|
Skunk Shampoo
Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic
9
|
Posted - 2012.07.09 14:35:00 -
[11] - Quote
Honestly, if using certain tactics are not the "correct" way to play... Then what's the fuss if it gets nerfed? ;)
Besides, how can CCP find the right balance unless players push the limits and reveal everything that can be exploited? I have no issue with the dropship taking a chunk of damage for slamming against the ground. Dropships on the tower would be a lot less effective once players on the ground can see them. Once I know where they are at, my forge gun can take them in 2 shots... 1 if i hit the gunner. This is all good. |
Kain Spero
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
907
|
Posted - 2012.07.09 17:12:00 -
[12] - Quote
I really haven't had too much trouble with tower dropships. Someone just needs to call out their location on coms and then I blast it with my forge gun. Drop ships are a lot easier to hit when parked. |
Traynor Youngs
Royal Uhlans Amarr Empire
287
|
Posted - 2012.07.09 18:59:00 -
[13] - Quote
zekina zek wrote:how much time have you spent flying a dropship? and how much of that time did you have gunners? i squish the hell out of the other team so my team realizes that they need to get in my gun seats because i am an impressive pilot. once i have a gunner, or two, i dont squish(as much )
Agreed 1000% |
Geirskoegul
Soul-Strike
134
|
Posted - 2012.07.09 19:13:00 -
[14] - Quote
Sorry, I got stuck on him condemning the use of remote explosives as an in-a-pinch grenade (somewhat reasonable) and advocating its use for spawn-camping (REALLY?!). While not exactly conventional, it could work. The spawncamping, on the other hand, is 100% pure bullshit. By all means, mine choke points, but the spawn itself is ridiculous (and easily fixed, by not letting you place explosives within a radius of spawn-in points). Had exactly this happen yesterday, don't know how many remote explosives come with a loadout, but he used at least 10 to kill people trying to spawn at the only forward spawn. That's, quite simply, cheap, unreasonable, and unrealistic. FAR more unrealistic than throwing C4 at someone then triggering the detonator. You blow up the thing that people spawn out of, you don't just camp it for free kills (and they are free, since it's literally impossible to get out of the blast radius in time). |
Beta Phish
Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation
28
|
Posted - 2012.07.09 19:26:00 -
[15] - Quote
Gimmick = Abusing what is Broken/UnBalanced is Beta
thats what you really mean |
Traynor Youngs
Royal Uhlans Amarr Empire
287
|
Posted - 2012.07.09 19:32:00 -
[16] - Quote
Geirskoegul wrote:Sorry, I got stuck on him condemning the use of remote explosives as an in-a-pinch grenade (somewhat reasonable) and advocating its use for spawn-camping (REALLY?!). While not exactly conventional, it could work. The spawncamping, on the other hand, is 100% pure bullshit. By all means, mine choke points, but the spawn itself is ridiculous (and easily fixed, by not letting you place explosives within a radius of spawn-in points). Had exactly this happen yesterday, don't know how many remote explosives come with a loadout, but he used at least 10 to kill people trying to spawn at the only forward spawn. That's, quite simply, cheap, unreasonable, and unrealistic. FAR more unrealistic than throwing C4 at someone then triggering the detonator. You blow up the thing that people spawn out of, you don't just camp it for free kills (and they are free, since it's literally impossible to get out of the blast radius in time).
There is no need to prevent placing explosives in spawn points since spawning in the same place is a known bug.
Once they fix the spawn bug, everything will be fine. |
Geirskoegul
Soul-Strike
134
|
Posted - 2012.07.09 19:34:00 -
[17] - Quote
Traynor Youngs wrote:Geirskoegul wrote:Sorry, I got stuck on him condemning the use of remote explosives as an in-a-pinch grenade (somewhat reasonable) and advocating its use for spawn-camping (REALLY?!). While not exactly conventional, it could work. The spawncamping, on the other hand, is 100% pure bullshit. By all means, mine choke points, but the spawn itself is ridiculous (and easily fixed, by not letting you place explosives within a radius of spawn-in points). Had exactly this happen yesterday, don't know how many remote explosives come with a loadout, but he used at least 10 to kill people trying to spawn at the only forward spawn. That's, quite simply, cheap, unreasonable, and unrealistic. FAR more unrealistic than throwing C4 at someone then triggering the detonator. You blow up the thing that people spawn out of, you don't just camp it for free kills (and they are free, since it's literally impossible to get out of the blast radius in time). There is no need to prevent placing explosives in spawn points since spawning in the same place is a known bug. Once they fix the spawn bug, everything will be fine. Depends on the implementation of the fix, really. Either way, I'd support having destructible spawns and a hefty point reward for killing them, specifically to discourage spawn-camping. No spawn at all is better than spawn-camp-farming bullshit. |
Traynor Youngs
Royal Uhlans Amarr Empire
287
|
Posted - 2012.07.09 19:42:00 -
[18] - Quote
Geirskoegul wrote:Traynor Youngs wrote:Geirskoegul wrote:Sorry, I got stuck on him condemning the use of remote explosives as an in-a-pinch grenade (somewhat reasonable) and advocating its use for spawn-camping (REALLY?!). While not exactly conventional, it could work. The spawncamping, on the other hand, is 100% pure bullshit. By all means, mine choke points, but the spawn itself is ridiculous (and easily fixed, by not letting you place explosives within a radius of spawn-in points). Had exactly this happen yesterday, don't know how many remote explosives come with a loadout, but he used at least 10 to kill people trying to spawn at the only forward spawn. That's, quite simply, cheap, unreasonable, and unrealistic. FAR more unrealistic than throwing C4 at someone then triggering the detonator. You blow up the thing that people spawn out of, you don't just camp it for free kills (and they are free, since it's literally impossible to get out of the blast radius in time). There is no need to prevent placing explosives in spawn points since spawning in the same place is a known bug. Once they fix the spawn bug, everything will be fine. Depends on the implementation of the fix, really. Either way, I'd support having destructible spawns and a hefty point reward for killing them, specifically to discourage spawn-camping. No spawn at all is better than spawn-camp-farming bullshit.
Intended Spawn Mechanic: You spawn in some random area around the spawn point and not always in the same place. The area is supped to be some radius from the point big enough to be "un camp able"
Except for drop uplinks, which I think is supposed to be right on top of it every time.
Destroying CRU's is not a bug, thats just smart gameplay. |
Geirskoegul
Soul-Strike
134
|
Posted - 2012.07.09 19:54:00 -
[19] - Quote
Traynor Youngs wrote:Geirskoegul wrote:Traynor Youngs wrote:Geirskoegul wrote:Sorry, I got stuck on him condemning the use of remote explosives as an in-a-pinch grenade (somewhat reasonable) and advocating its use for spawn-camping (REALLY?!). While not exactly conventional, it could work. The spawncamping, on the other hand, is 100% pure bullshit. By all means, mine choke points, but the spawn itself is ridiculous (and easily fixed, by not letting you place explosives within a radius of spawn-in points). Had exactly this happen yesterday, don't know how many remote explosives come with a loadout, but he used at least 10 to kill people trying to spawn at the only forward spawn. That's, quite simply, cheap, unreasonable, and unrealistic. FAR more unrealistic than throwing C4 at someone then triggering the detonator. You blow up the thing that people spawn out of, you don't just camp it for free kills (and they are free, since it's literally impossible to get out of the blast radius in time). There is no need to prevent placing explosives in spawn points since spawning in the same place is a known bug. Once they fix the spawn bug, everything will be fine. Depends on the implementation of the fix, really. Either way, I'd support having destructible spawns and a hefty point reward for killing them, specifically to discourage spawn-camping. No spawn at all is better than spawn-camp-farming bullshit. Intended Spawn Mechanic: You spawn in some random area around the spawn point and not always in the same place. The area is supped to be some radius from the point big enough to be "un camp able" Except for drop uplinks, which I think is supposed to be right on top of it every time. Destroying CRU's is not a bug, thats just smart gameplay. I agree about the CRUs, I'm saying I'd be fine with ALL points you can spawn at having something physical you spawn at, like the tubes in PlanetSide. I say give their destruction a high point value to encourage destroying them, rather than camping there and farming the people spawning in them, like failnubs would often do in PlanetSide. |
bjorn morkai
Sanmatar Kelkoons Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2012.07.09 22:43:00 -
[20] - Quote
Seeker of Cheese wrote:There's a quick test for tactics: Did it work? Then it's the correct way to use it.
no no no no no thats not how tactics work. take a lesson from the 40k universe: "if your plan is working, its a trap." "the most dangerous thing on the field is a junior officer with a compass and a map" "incoming fire has the right of way" "fight battles that are small enough to win, but large enough to matter" "attack is the only order worth remembering" "everyone has a soft spot. its right under your chin and its called your neck." "if all else fails, waive your hands above your head, run around in little circles and begin screaming."
there, you are now fully capable of fighting. |
|
RolyatDerTeufel
D3ath D3alers RISE of LEGION
1648
|
Posted - 2012.07.09 22:45:00 -
[21] - Quote
Hey i requested sliding, guess i'm one of those players too some people. :D |
Da Lancer
Tritan-Industries Legacy Rising
15
|
Posted - 2012.07.10 01:50:00 -
[22] - Quote
Geirskoegul wrote:Sorry, I got stuck on him condemning the use of remote explosives as an in-a-pinch grenade (somewhat reasonable) and advocating its use for spawn-camping (REALLY?!). While not exactly conventional, it could work. The spawncamping, on the other hand, is 100% pure bullshit. By all means, mine choke points, but the spawn itself is ridiculous (and easily fixed, by not letting you place explosives within a radius of spawn-in points). Had exactly this happen yesterday, don't know how many remote explosives come with a loadout, but he used at least 10 to kill people trying to spawn at the only forward spawn. That's, quite simply, cheap, unreasonable, and unrealistic. FAR more unrealistic than throwing C4 at someone then triggering the detonator. You blow up the thing that people spawn out of, you don't just camp it for free kills (and they are free, since it's literally impossible to get out of the blast radius in time).
The problem I noticed with spawn camping near the letter objectives is that you always spawn in the same part near the objective, which while better and less cheap than spawning right on the objective, is still too easy to predict. Instead when a player chooses a spawn point they get 2-3 different spawn spots in the same direction at relatively the same distance from the letter objectives.
Another solution could be a trick from killzone mulitplayer: when choosing spawn points you get a camera near the area showing you how much fighting is going on near there, also giving the player a visual way to see a enemy bombing up your spawn. If you are trying to spawn at a heavly contested spawn, you should know the risk you are putting yourself in! |
Jardin Gooche
Osmon Surveillance Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.10 03:17:00 -
[23] - Quote
I think the gunner-less dropships issue is checken-and-egg.
I want to be a dropship gunner, and I am constantly sprinting after empty dropships to get on board only to have them park on a building (to snipe) or (when there is another gunner on board) point my gun at the edge of the mao.
I know there are good pilots out there, but not many.
It would also be good to be able to tell (maybe I am just not looking lose enough) whether you are boarding an aluminium foil drophip or one that has a decent chance of staying in the air for a while. |
Ender Storm
Amarr Templars Amarr Empire
50
|
Posted - 2012.07.10 12:32:00 -
[24] - Quote
zekina zek wrote:how much time have you spent flying a dropship? and how much of that time did you have gunners? i squish the hell out of the other team so my team realizes that they need to get in my gun seats because i am an impressive pilot. once i have a gunner, or two, i dont squish(as much )
Well most dropships take flight as soon as they spawn not letting people get close enough to embark.
Other times when you embart, the dropship is just going up to a tower because the pilot wants to camp.
So meh. |
Rykenth Drekk
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
76
|
Posted - 2012.07.10 13:27:00 -
[25] - Quote
Two words for this whole post....
Battlefield... Roll... |
Dalton Smithe
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
45
|
Posted - 2012.07.11 06:01:00 -
[26] - Quote
bjorn morkai wrote:Seeker of Cheese wrote:There's a quick test for tactics: Did it work? Then it's the correct way to use it. no no no no no thats not how tactics work. take a lesson from the 40k universe: "if your plan is working, its a trap." "the most dangerous thing on the field is a junior officer with a compass and a map" "incoming fire has the right of way" "fight battles that are small enough to win, but large enough to matter" "attack is the only order worth remembering" "everyone has a soft spot. its right under your chin and its called your neck." "if all else fails, waive your hands above your head, run around in little circles and begin screaming." there, you are now fully capable of fighting.
Actually that comes from some time before 40k, its murphy's law of combat... |
Geirskoegul
Soul-Strike
134
|
Posted - 2012.07.14 06:21:00 -
[27] - Quote
Da Lancer wrote:Another solution could be a trick from killzone mulitplayer: when choosing spawn points you get a camera near the area showing you how much fighting is going on near there, also giving the player a visual way to see a enemy bombing up your spawn. If you are trying to spawn at a heavly contested spawn, you should know the risk you are putting yourself in! No, no, no, NOOOO. No free intel. Period. Anywhere. You want intel? Gather it. The system you propose is like what the Consu believe in "Old Man's War." Let's kill off one of our guys, then his ghost can go check out these other locations and report back what it sees. Wounds familiar, right? Because it's exactly the risk-free intel you're suggesting.
No intel that isn't earned, no killcams, no spawncams, no automatic, free identification of exact suit models / tiers (other than, MAYBE overall class such as pilot/heavy/scout/assault/etc.
Earn your intel.
Dalton Smithe wrote:bjorn morkai wrote:Seeker of Cheese wrote:There's a quick test for tactics: Did it work? Then it's the correct way to use it. no no no no no thats not how tactics work. take a lesson from the 40k universe: "if your plan is working, its a trap." "the most dangerous thing on the field is a junior officer with a compass and a map" "incoming fire has the right of way" "fight battles that are small enough to win, but large enough to matter" "attack is the only order worth remembering" "everyone has a soft spot. its right under your chin and its called your neck." "if all else fails, waive your hands above your head, run around in little circles and begin screaming." there, you are now fully capable of fighting. Actually that comes from some time before 40k, its murphy's law of combat... Also from Skippy's List and Schlock Mercenary. |
Daionnis Magnifico
Doomheim
4
|
Posted - 2012.07.14 06:58:00 -
[28] - Quote
Geirskoegul wrote:No, no, no, NOOOO. No free intel. Period. Anywhere. You want intel? Gather it. The system you propose is like what the Consu believe in "Old Man's War." Let's kill off one of our guys, then his ghost can go check out these other locations and report back what it sees. Wounds familiar, right? Because it's exactly the risk-free intel you're suggesting.
No intel that isn't earned, no killcams, no spawncams, no automatic, free identification of exact suit models / tiers (other than, MAYBE overall class such as pilot/heavy/scout/assault/etc.
Earn your intel.
Easily fixable by making it so dead teammate can't talk over comms.
|
Grit Breather
BetaMax.
660
|
Posted - 2012.07.14 08:48:00 -
[29] - Quote
I am totally for the ideas behind this post and some of the replys. However, some of what's been said here is just rubbish. I'll summarise like this.
For starters, anything that works as a tactic is valid. If something is being used that is not supposed to be used, it's not balanced and of course it'll get abused. Look at real life choppers. They aren't used in battle to squish people. They don't run you over as a battle tactic. Why? Many reasons. For starters, killing a single soldier on the battlefield won't help anyone. Battles aren't about K/D. Battles are about objectives and the final outcome (usually leading to the next battle). Choppers are so busy carrying out objectives that they just don't have the time to deal with infantry work. Now back to the game. Why is squishing a good tactic? Because it works. Why does it work? Have you ever tried squishing someone with a real chopper? It's amazingly stupid. It would either be so slow (as to avoid self damage) that anyone with half a brain would actually move out of the way. Or it would be so destructive to the chopper that it wouldn't be able to take off again. I'm guessing the crew would even be tossed out of the vehicle upon impact.
So no. Dropship squishings don't need to be nerfed. They need to be balanced. A pilot needs to understand that hitting the ground fast has grave consequences.
Those are my 2 cents. |
Hellhammer Tactical
Algintal Core Gallente Federation
45
|
Posted - 2012.07.14 10:36:00 -
[30] - Quote
i see dropships as vague helecopters, designed to get soldiers into the fight and provide cover, not big mean squishing machines (thats an Lav's job) squasihing should do damage to the dropship, although i guess anything too close to the exhausts should be toasted.
that said i love being able to see a dropship coming and charge a forge shot ready. |
|
Geirskoegul
Soul-Strike
134
|
Posted - 2012.07.15 12:18:00 -
[31] - Quote
Daionnis Magnifico wrote:Geirskoegul wrote:No, no, no, NOOOO. No free intel. Period. Anywhere. You want intel? Gather it. The system you propose is like what the Consu believe in "Old Man's War." Let's kill off one of our guys, then his ghost can go check out these other locations and report back what it sees. Wounds familiar, right? Because it's exactly the risk-free intel you're suggesting.
No intel that isn't earned, no killcams, no spawncams, no automatic, free identification of exact suit models / tiers (other than, MAYBE overall class such as pilot/heavy/scout/assault/etc.
Earn your intel.
Easily fixable by making it so dead teammate can't talk over comms. 1) That only works if when you die once, you're out for the remainder of the match, otherwise it just means you report the intel 12 seconds later (allowing 2 seconds to select spawnpoint and loadout).
2) That would only serve to cause squads to set laptops next to them and use Mumble or TS with voice activation turned on.
Your solution only actually "works" in games like ArmA2, when playing entirely within (and against!) a group of FRIENDS whose focus is on realism and immersion. Any other situation will simply cause people to make the call that is most advantageous to them.
Grit Breather wrote:I am totally for the ideas behind this post and some of the replys. However, some of what's been said here is just rubbish. I'll summarise like this.
For starters, anything that works as a tactic is valid. If something is being used that is not supposed to be used, it's not balanced and of course it'll get abused. Look at real life choppers. They aren't used in battle to squish people. They don't run you over as a battle tactic. Why? Many reasons. For starters, killing a single soldier on the battlefield won't help anyone. Battles aren't about K/D. Battles are about objectives and the final outcome (usually leading to the next battle). Choppers are so busy carrying out objectives that they just don't have the time to deal with infantry work. Now back to the game. Why is squishing a good tactic? Because it works. Why does it work? Have you ever tried squishing someone with a real chopper? It's amazingly stupid. It would either be so slow (as to avoid self damage) that anyone with half a brain would actually move out of the way. Or it would be so destructive to the chopper that it wouldn't be able to take off again. I'm guessing the crew would even be tossed out of the vehicle upon impact.
So no. Dropship squishings don't need to be nerfed. They need to be balanced. A pilot needs to understand that hitting the ground fast has grave consequences.
Those are my 2 cents. And that's basically my point, and I said as much in one of my earlier posts in this or another thread. Simply increase the impact damage that dropships receive. Very quickly you'll see people avoiding hitting things (go figure.) That said, we need to increase the impact damage to infantry by tanks and jeeps, because as it stands, it's way too light (or seems it). The only time I've had one hurt me was while I was hacking a terminal and he literally crushed me between the terminal and his jeep, then drove off again.
Though that actually raises another issue, since the jeeps seem to be incapable of receiving environmental damage. In a tank, if I bump into a pillar 2 meters behind me, starting from a dead stop, i take damage (1-5% armour on the soma with a DCU). Meanwhile I was flying all over the place, slamming into things, and generally behaving like a drunken squirrel that's just snorted an 8-ball, and it doesn't even touch the shields. Seems kinda backwards, don't you think? haha
|
TabbieKat
72
|
Posted - 2012.07.15 22:56:00 -
[32] - Quote
Some of you have gotten why I have done this post and others did not. If you actually spend the time to read my two previous posts I am attempting to NOT get stuffed nurfed. Using remote explosives as a pinch grenade is fine but I have seen people only use it because it is an easy kill. If this keeps up people will complain about it. The more people that complain about it will equal Nurf. I do not want to see the damage or the blast radius get nurfed because it was overused for easy kills.
As for Dropships, yes landing on someone in this game is easy to do and I have done it myself. But i also do not go around looking for people to squish. Either i do it when i am taking off, trying to sweep people off of a tower, or trying to get rid of a pesky guy on a tower shooting at me while i wait for people to gun for me. People getting Dropships and squishing people all the time will result in the crushing damage being nurfed. In the new Communications Map I see the drop ship being used like it should be as air support. Annoying as all hell when the Dropship is on the other team but ehh shoot it down... or try , and/or get your own. They still squish people but not very often. |
Geirskoegul
Soul-Strike
134
|
Posted - 2012.07.15 23:08:00 -
[33] - Quote
TabbieKat wrote:Some of you have gotten why I have done this post and others did not. If you actually spend the time to read my two previous posts I am attempting to NOT get stuffed nurfed. Using remote explosives as a pinch grenade is fine but I have seen people only use it because it is an easy kill. If this keeps up people will complain about it. The more people that complain about it will equal Nurf. I do not want to see the damage or the blast radius get nurfed because it was overused for easy kills.
As for Dropships, yes landing on someone in this game is easy to do and I have done it myself. But i also do not go around looking for people to squish. Either i do it when i am taking off, trying to sweep people off of a tower, or trying to get rid of a pesky guy on a tower shooting at me while i wait for people to gun for me. People getting Dropships and squishing people all the time will result in the crushing damage being nurfed. In the new Communications Map I see the drop ship being used like it should be as air support. Annoying as all hell when the Dropship is on the other team but ehh shoot it down... or try , and/or get your own. They still squish people but not very often. You don't know CCP that well if you think whinging is sufficient to get them to ruin their game. Taking a look at EVE, they've made some extremely unpopular changes, that were in fact to the great benefit of the game (one of the biggest I can think of is the big nano nerf a few years back.) Their focus is on making an awesome game, not appeasing the whiners. That strategy has made them the only MMORPG in the three-decade history of the genre that has shown consistent growth for even HALF as long as they have, and they show no signs of peaking.
If they nerf something, expect it to be the reasons or ability to misuse something (for example, allowing us to cook grenades, and making their behavior more consistent and predictable), rather than nerfing that something as a band-aid fix. Nerfs and buffs without thought to balance or consequences are more a SOE and Actiblizzion thing. CCP is very much hands-off, and they only make large changes where there's a legitimate need for the good of the game, whether that change will be popular at first or not. |
TabbieKat
72
|
Posted - 2012.07.15 23:26:00 -
[34] - Quote
no whining here as i can see you do not understand. things work but when people over use things because it makes it easy to win and generally pisses off the other people will get things nurfed. not whining at all just warning. if you like the RE and the Dropship squishing you with either agree that they are being overused and you do not want them nurfed, or you will say i am an idiot for warning you before the flood. As for the people that hate them either they will say they need to be nurfed or taken out because they are too powerful or if they were toned down a bit they really work well in the game.
All in all I think they work well, add in Friendly Fire and a Penalty though either ISK and or SP for killing your own people and that will make them more strategic. |
Geirskoegul
Soul-Strike
134
|
Posted - 2012.07.15 23:40:00 -
[35] - Quote
TabbieKat wrote:no whining here as i can see you do not understand. things work but when people over use things because it makes it easy to win and generally pisses off the other people will get things nurfed. not whining at all just warning. if you like the RE and the Dropship squishing you with either agree that they are being overused and you do not want them nurfed, or you will say i am an idiot for warning you before the flood. As for the people that hate them either they will say they need to be nurfed or taken out because they are too powerful or if they were toned down a bit they really work well in the game.
All in all I think they work well, add in Friendly Fire and a Penalty though either ISK and or SP for killing your own people and that will make them more strategic. Again, it's you that doesn't seem to understand. CCPs general strategy is to let people figure out how to counter it. If there isn't a counter, they might make small tweaks to introduce a viable counter. If something truly is broken, they'll make the change necessary, regardless of if it's popular or not.
The fixes to the "issues" listed here are simple: randomize spawns (or provide physical spawn devices at all spawnable areas with a strong point incentive to kill them rather than farm them), make normal grenades better (allow cooking, and make their behavior more consistent and predictable), and increase the impact damage received by jeeps and dropships that crash into people and objects.
These are all good balance fixes, and are not really buffs or nerfs, simply tweaking them to bring them more in line with how they SHOULD be, and encourage normal gameplay.
You're letting your experience with other companies shade your perspective. Arbitrary buffs and nerfs, consequences be damned, are the territory of Actiblizzion, SOE, and similar. CCP avoids big changes like the plague, and nothing they do is a knee-jerk. They always have an eye to the consequences.
SP and ISK penalties for teamkilling aren't just broken and ********, but completely fly in the face of what this universe is. Betrayal is a part of the game. You're jumping on a knee-jerk solution, as opposed to smaller, more subtle changes, to guide player behavior in line with intended gameplay. My suggestions do this; yours do not. |
TabbieKat
72
|
Posted - 2012.07.16 00:23:00 -
[36] - Quote
Well Geirskoegul lets agree to disagree, yes I have found counters and i know adding friendly fire damage to the game will stop people from just throwing RE's willy nilly. I also know if they increase the Draw Distance for Dropships this will also keep people from just popping out of no where and squishing you. As for the penalty thing, yes I do get this is a game that supports a "I will do what I want when I want" mentality and I like that. Maybe when they add corporations into the game "player ones not the default ones" the people in charge of it will get an option to penalize members for killing people on their side as it hurts their bottom line. Just saying this is all Knee-Jerk reactions is not right. Yes I have played other games and while CCP owns this game they are partnered with SOE to bring you this game.
I get what you are saying and I understand and I am glad to know you trust CCP enough to see the next few squares ahead to get a broader picture of what is going on. I really do understand what you are saying and where you are coming from. I respect your opinion on the game as a whole and I hope you respect mine, because without respect I will just say, (to quote Adam Savage) "I reject your reality and substitute my own." |
Geirskoegul
Soul-Strike
134
|
Posted - 2012.07.16 01:07:00 -
[37] - Quote
TabbieKat wrote:Well Geirskoegul lets agree to disagree, yes I have found counters and i know adding friendly fire damage to the game will stop people from just throwing RE's willy nilly. I also know if they increase the Draw Distance for Dropships this will also keep people from just popping out of no where and squishing you. As for the penalty thing, yes I do get this is a game that supports a "I will do what I want when I want" mentality and I like that. Maybe when they add corporations into the game "player ones not the default ones" the people in charge of it will get an option to penalize members for killing people on their side as it hurts their bottom line. Just saying this is all Knee-Jerk reactions is not right. Yes I have played other games and while CCP owns this game they are partnered with SOE to bring you this game.
I get what you are saying and I understand and I am glad to know you trust CCP enough to see the next few squares ahead to get a broader picture of what is going on. I really do understand what you are saying and where you are coming from. I respect your opinion on the game as a whole and I hope you respect mine, because without respect I will just say, (to quote Adam Savage) "I reject your reality and substitute my own." Working closely with SOE is not the same as partnered. One of the reasons it became PS3 exclusive is that MSFT was unwilling to let CCP do things their way. |
Galthur
CrimeWave Syndicate
22
|
Posted - 2012.07.16 01:18:00 -
[38] - Quote
Corban Lahnder wrote:Squishing always exposes drop ships to alot of fire So I have viewed it as a valid risk reward trade off.
the tower thing is getting ludcirous though. Either they need to adjust the flight cieling of the drop ships, increase the inacuracy of launchers at extreme long range, or just limit there range, also with the safe unsafe zones they could use that to imply a flight cieling for zones.
Moral of the story is theres lots of mechanics to end tower sniping and the game was a lot more fun and balanced with out it. I don't agree with either of those, i agree with CCP's plan of adding artillary turrets for tanks, lets see them up there then |
TabbieKat
72
|
Posted - 2012.07.16 01:42:00 -
[39] - Quote
Geirskoegul wrote: Working closely with SOE is not the same as partnered. One of the reasons it became PS3 exclusive is that MSFT was unwilling to let CCP do things their way.
They have a business contract with them so that CCP has the use of the PS3 as a medium to get their game out, while they control the game they do not control the PS3 ie a partnership over rights. Also while CCP can control what they sell on the market, SOE gets a profit off of them using it. Now is it a 50/50 contract, no. CCP reserves the creative rights to Dust 514 while SOE reserves the rights of their programming. If you really want to get technical, Unreal owns the game seeing as they are using their engine to run it. If Unreal felt they were not getting the contract fulfilled with them they could kill Dust in two seconds.
They are contractual partners, Sony has giving Unreal the codes for the PS3 to adjust their engine to be usable on the PS3 and Unreal has allowed CCP to use their PS3 version of the Unreal Engine to make Dust. Sony has allowed CCP to use the PS3 as a platform and though contracts that both companies feel benefits both of them, Dust is a reality. All people that are working with CCP to make Dust are partners though contracts.
Now as to how much creative licence is given SOE in Dust, I do not know and i know "unless you have read the contract" do not know either. They may have control over parts or none at all. Yes EVE is a big success but so is WoW. OMG OMG Tabbie said WoW. EVE is for the more sophisticated and older player were as WoW is geared to the Younger crowd. Where Dust sits is to be determined at the moment. |
Geirskoegul
Soul-Strike
134
|
Posted - 2012.07.16 02:11:00 -
[40] - Quote
TabbieKat wrote:Geirskoegul wrote: Working closely with SOE is not the same as partnered. One of the reasons it became PS3 exclusive is that MSFT was unwilling to let CCP do things their way.
They have a business contract with them so that CCP has the use of the PS3 as a medium to get their game out, while they control the game they do not control the PS3 ie a partnership over rights. Also while CCP can control what they sell on the market, SOE gets a profit off of them using it. Now is it a 50/50 contract, no. CCP reserves the creative rights to Dust 514 while SOE reserves the rights of their programming. If you really want to get technical, Unreal owns the game seeing as they are using their engine to run it. If Unreal felt they were not getting the contract fulfilled with them they could kill Dust in two seconds. They are contractual partners, Sony has giving Unreal the codes for the PS3 to adjust their engine to be usable on the PS3 and Unreal has allowed CCP to use their PS3 version of the Unreal Engine to make Dust. Sony has allowed CCP to use the PS3 as a platform and though contracts that both companies feel benefits both of them, Dust is a reality. All people that are working with CCP to make Dust are partners though contracts. Now as to how much creative licence is given SOE in Dust, I do not know and i know "unless you have read the contract" do not know either. They may have control over parts or none at all. Yes EVE is a big success but so is WoW. OMG OMG Tabbie said WoW. EVE is for the more sophisticated and older player were as WoW is geared to the Younger crowd. Where Dust sits is to be determined at the moment. Were the terms of engine licensing as ridiculous as you imply, no one would license an engine. What you describe sounds like what Oracle was trying to do with anything written in or for Java: "use our APIs, we own you."
What you say seems to describe the deal Sony has with anyone else. CCP would appear to have full control and discretion over Dust, within the standard rules for any software on the PS3. I don't see anything indicating that SOE would have the power to force CCP to make detrimental changes to the game in violation of their previous history and behaviour when it comes to handling balancing their games. |
|
TabbieKat
72
|
Posted - 2012.07.16 02:17:00 -
[41] - Quote
Geirskoegul, were you on a debate team in High School/Grammar School/Collage because you sure can debate a point. And if you are still in HS/GS/Collage then you should be. You would be good. |
Geirskoegul
Soul-Strike
134
|
Posted - 2012.07.16 02:29:00 -
[42] - Quote
I think I'll take that as a compliment? heh
And no, never did debate team, but I do follow things I find interesting. I'm also highly active on the Ars Technica forums, and whenever subjects like global warming, software patents, copyright, etc. come up, trolls and other ignorant individuals show up in force. Arguing a point on here is cakewalk compared to there (and requires far less sourcing, since here it's usually just a matter of logic and explaining things; there I actually have to find the scientific proof to shut up the idiots, or at least to be able to do so while calling them out for baseless assertions that credible sources CAN"T be found for.)
It's further exacerbated by the fact that I'm taking a writing and a public speaking course at the moment, and I'm currently working on the persuasive research paper and persuasive speech for the two respectively, heh. Kinda already has me in debate mode (4.0 GPA so far in all my classes, not bad considering the last time I was in school was the better part of a decade ago, and i'm working full time while I'm doing this haha). |
TabbieKat
72
|
Posted - 2012.07.16 02:38:00 -
[43] - Quote
Well to be honest I see us arguing the same side of the same coin. Some points we differ but in most of it we are saying the same thing. We both do not want unnecessary nurfs. I do not know CCP as well as you do and yes my past has scared me from people using gimmicks and forcing a nurf that ruins the game. I really hope you are right about CCP but we will not know for 100% until the game goes live.
PS:and yes that was a compliment and an insult to a worthy foe LOL |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |