Kazeno Rannaa
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
145
   |
Posted - 2012.09.06 16:29:00 -
[1] - Quote
In all honesty, the role of the HAV needs to be further elaborated upon. This fluctuation between buffing and nerfing of equipment (weapons, dropsuits, and vehicles alike), granted is a necessary aspect of a beta, seems to me to be TOO much of a play to the crowd (the herd-poison infecting the demagogues, interesting??!!??) rather than it being a complete application of of a pre-existing plan and role for the equipment being deployed upon the battlefield.
IN a contemporary time line, i.e., now, a tank on the battlefield is a game changer. For both sides. And they are able to get up to speed quite easily (given the advent and usage of such a thing like a 1500 HP jet turbine - M1A3). And we are supposed to be partaking in a universe that has galactic travel, consciousness transference, and other gloriously imaginative things. If history has played a part (a history of a sorts, not necessarily our history) then the HAV (tank) should also be a game changer. They should not be easy to kill, made so because they are SOOO expensive. So why should someone that is not operating the equipment, let alone fielding it, make it their job to shorten the lifespan of said equipment because some people on the ground that have decided NOT to skill in the directions (and field the necessary equipment that are connected to those skills) needed to handle the given situations? (EDIT: I know that something may have created us, but I don't see it telling us " hay, that tank you made. well, ... it's TOOOO good. You have to take it down a notch." On the other hand it does let us produce the biggest and baddest stuff for war and blow the S%*T out of other countries. So why not here?) Essentially this is the idea; if I am a proper tanker/tank commander, why should I be limited in how long I am able to furnish the survival of my equipment? CCP hasn't done that to EVE players and their ships (Granted EVE has gone through a number of iterations and balancing issues over the last 10 years). If you play in EVE and you are able to PVP and PVE without loosing your ship, you are not penalized by your skill. If anything you are rewarded because you don't have to spend the ISK to regather the modules and the ship hull to rebuild for favorite ship. Instead you get to bank the cash and work on other ventures.
Why, as DUSTERS, are we being placed into a different frame of mind and understanding, if ultimately we are doing this for the money, and there is no better way to make money than by not dying (if at all possible) and maintaining the same equipment (i.e., not having to spend the money to replace gear unnecessarily). If there is an issue with the survivability of certain pieces of equipment, un-nerf the forge guns and bring into play other pieces of AV gear to help balance this issue. That is what we do today in warfare; we don't go to our enemies and say "BTW, that tank you guys are fielding, well .... I can't seem to destroy the damn thing. Can you thin up the armor and have your guys drive slower so I can blow it up?"
They would look at you like you are crazy, laugh at you, and then call in their own OB/OS.
Without the balance of the market items being available to the players to see how that equipment and the fielding of said equipment begins to fill the gaps left by or produced by the fielding of the existing gear, this constant catering to these OP's inability to work in teams, use the in-game comms, and problem solve on the fly (this is an issue I see with this younger generation of players and people) is only going to cause more headaches for the developers and programers down the road as they realize that they have to change everything back because the adjustments they made to cater to these people was really unfounded and not based upon the entire reality being presented. It was based upon a reality as seen through the eyes of some horse with blinders on (i.e., narrow and limited).
I say this in relation to the fact that the nerfs and buffs that have occurred since the initial build that hit back in December of this year have been so extreme as to cause a number of people to become very polarized about the game, about CCP's ability to produce the product and experience that have envisioned, and produce a product that is not only true to themselves, but also true to the new community of DUSTERS and EVE pilots. This is a new community that is being created amongst an existing community (as it always happens - fusing and fissioning).
What I see is this; a lot of those individuals that want everything to work perfect now with only a fraction of the game mechanics and equipment available are out of their minds. We are still in the beta phase, which means the exploration of what is and what could be. Yet the thing that I find interesting is the fact that we (as a collective group of people within this beta) seem to forget that CCP has dedicated themselves to producing a longer term product and experience. Not just another COD, BF, BFBC, MOH or any other of the once great FPS games (and I have enjoyed them all at one point in time or another). Those were games that were only single iterations in a line of a hopeful franchise.
Rather DUST, much like EVE, I would rather describe it as being almost an entity in it of itself. A game that will grow and evolve as the players and CCP does. It seems to me that their intentions with DUST are along the same lines as what they have intended and have fought hard to produce in EVE.
So lets hold off on OVER NERFING CCP, please!?!!?! I feel that we have only seen the 10% of the ice berg that happens to exist above water. The other 90% is waiting to be discovered and revealed to us. So blowing off the top of it is not going to show what lies beneath the surface. We need to be guided, but we also need to be understanding and patient.
Rome wasn't built in a day, and neither was New Eden. So what is driving us to expect that DUST should be now? |