DUST Search - Why CCP Uses a Nerf Sledge Hammer Instead of a Rubber Mallet

All Channels

General Discussions

Why CCP Uses a Nerf Sledge Hammer Instead of a Rubber Mallet

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Baal Omniscient L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising 248	Posted - 2013.01.15 11:34:00 - [1] - Quote A very good point was brought up by Free Beers in a laser rifle thread by King Babar, and I was wondering if any of you could explain to me why it is that CCP does this. Free Beers wrote: The other point is that when we say stuff is broken we never hear about it till ccp says "they fixed it" in patch notes. They would never really dicuss it with us or ask us for solutions or throw stuff at us about idea to fix it. Nope they just hammer it as they see fit. Which is their problem and sadly, not a damn thing we can do about it. Trust me about every thing they have nerfed need to be tweeked but not the the extreme they do things. I doubt anyone from CCP will officially respond, but I want to know why it is that CCP refuses to bounce ideas within the community about how to change things. Get feedback on ideas they have to make the game batter rather than taking a bunch of random feedback on the topic and patching together a giant nerf IED. If they had bounced ideas with the community, they would have known that if they nerfed the damage and reduced the radius a bit, we'd have been fine with missiles being super accurate and infinite ranged. Or they could have left the damage and splash alone but made them super inaccurate and limited ranged (less realistic, but still viable for gameplay balancing purposes). But instead they took every negative thing they could and dropped it all on the missiles at once. And don't get me wrong, the missile crisis was probably the single most infuriating time in Dust for 99% of all non AV infantry players, including myself. I don't side with the missile jockeys on this one, they are better off as almost useless than a win button, I'm just saying that if CCP had bounced ideas with us, the people with the more reasonable solutions would have banded together and helped CCP prevent a whole turret option from becoming useless. But this is not a missile thread, that is just an example. My point in writing this all out is to ask you "Why do they do this?"

ChribbaX Otherworld Enterprises Dust Control Otherworld Empire Productions 136	Posted - 2013.01.15 11:44:00 - [2] - Quote While I can't say I know for sure if "CCP Dust" will or is acting the same way as "CCP EVE" I know that CE do listen more than people might think, even if it seems they are not. Dust is still beta and as such I am pretty sure CD has their view on how they should make the game and as a result might not listen just as much to us right now, but I am sure that once Dust gets a bit more "complete", balancing and such will involve a lot of players and their ideas and thoughts. Or well that's the very least I hope CD will do, else things won't go very well. /c

Snaps Tremor Tritan-Industries Legacy Rising 41	Posted - 2013.01.15 11:45:00 - [3] - Quote As a community it's impossible to say 'we' in a way that implies a coherent group. Players all bring their own experiences to the table, and getting closer to 'perfect' balance doesn't stop the level of yelling and bitching, it just diversifies it. Having seen the development of quite a few games in my time, I think the mark of a truly balanced game is being able to find a thread about every weapon in the game being OP.
Sha Kharn Clone Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 1087	Posted - 2013.01.15 11:46:00 - [4] - Quote Just unskilled at balancing an FPS game maybe? They lack the light touch and the easy does it one bit at a time approach when dealing with clearly op issues. It will get better with time I expect so I wonGÇÖt loose any sleep over it. Also CCP dam treat dust like a lady a little more yo.
Laurent Cazaderon Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 1155	Posted - 2013.01.15 11:46:00 - [5] - Quote I agree with that statement. CCP has a history with Dust of making way too heavy adjustments to the gameplay. 1) People complained about breach, which was imo justified. => They made it useless instead of trying to tweak it so it becomes more of a niche weapon. Adding a bigger recoil so it required more skill to be used effectively would have been pretty much enough to balance it. Instead they choose ROF and damage nerf. 2) People complain about HAV. => Nerf of res modules, hp, speed, turret speed. Boost of SL and FG damage. Boost of FG range. Too heavy 3) Grenade complaints about wonky trajectories => Trajectory fixed (even if still not natural) and fuse time reduced to 2 sec. Why ?!! 4) Complaints about heavies in early beta => Nerfed base hp, and made HMG fully useless 5) Later, complaints about HMG being useless => Raised damage back to a middle ground, raised accuracy for first shots, raised range. 6) Remote explosives complaints regarding people spamming and insta blowing them up => added a minimum time before blowing them up. reduced max carried RE (why ?) 7) Missile turret complaints on damage and splash damage => reduced both damage. Added a weird dispersion in accuracy. why ? 8) People complaining about too much straffing => reduced speed. ok. then reduced again slightly. meh, ok. Then reduced speed by another 25 %. Why ? etc...
Gunner Needed The Southern Legion 111	Posted - 2013.01.15 11:47:00 - [6] - Quote And who are they going to listen to? the people saying this, or the people saying that?
Laurent Cazaderon Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 1155	Posted - 2013.01.15 11:53:00 - [7] - Quote Gunner Needed wrote: And who are they going to listen to? the people saying this, or the people saying that? Problem is not about who to listen ! Problem is that something OP or UP usually only needs slight adjustments. And when you decide to make huge changes, you make it impossible for beta-testers to help you adjust it as you can render something OP completely useless and vice-versa. It's not a blame on listening complaints and dealing with it. It's about how they adapt the game to those. In my opinion, it's best to adjust slightly, see how it goes, and keep adjusting if needed. As when you go to hard, you just end up needing to fix a brand new problem. Nade are the latest example of an incomprehensible change.
Yay Adski Imperfects Negative-Feedback 133	Posted - 2013.01.15 11:54:00 - [8] - Quote It's just easier to nerf into oblivion then keep tweaking to get it right. It sucks because the longer it goes on the more of a mediocre shooter it becomes.
steadyhand amarr Imperfects Negative-Feedback 338	Posted - 2013.01.15 11:59:00 - [9] - Quote They main complaint is hitting everything at once rather than one thing and see how it affects things
Sha Kharn Clone Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 1087	Posted - 2013.01.15 12:29:00 - [10] - Quote steadyhand amarr wrote: They main complaint is hitting everything at once rather than one thing and see how it affects things Nail on the head. Its not hard CCP one small tweak at a time dont just mess with every variable you can think of or you learn nothing about the effects of each small change.

xAckie Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising 125	Posted - 2013.01.15 12:45:00 - [11] - Quote whilst in beta it is easier to make 'bigger' changes to the behaviour of weapons, vehicles, modules, and see what happens - how the change in balance impact gameplay, what FOM happens etc... when released on the 22nd i presume they will try and balance more subtly... if possible
Tech Ohm Eaven L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising 401	Posted - 2013.01.15 13:22:00 - [12] - Quote The kill data on the CCP servers. And thats why.
EnIgMa99 Imperfects Negative-Feedback 219	Posted - 2013.01.15 13:23:00 - [13] - Quote I wish my input about tac rifles would have been listened too before they made it a gun that no one will use ever. i.e. make the recoil recovery very high lessen the recoil till it gets to 6-7 shots and decrease the optimal rpm fire rate, like make it a creodon fire rate but semi auto.
Captain-Awesome Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 349	Posted - 2013.01.15 13:41:00 - [14] - Quote Rename thread to "CCPs Changes Are OP!" I really don't approve of their multi-property changes of an item - it takes longer to get right, takes more attempts, more work and less gain. It's unnecessary, unwanted and illogical should consider this thread a petition. and yes they should at least put votes to the community on what we think should change. give us a poll on whether items should be increased 0-10 (0 being no change, 10 being VERY big change) for example "complaints about HMG being too accurate, vote now: 0 - no change 1 - 2% reduction 2 - 4% reduction 3 - 6% reduction 4 - 8% reduction 5 - 10% reduction 6 - 12% reduction 7 - 14% reduction 8 - 16% reduction 9 - 18% reduction 10 - 20% reduction nothing should ever get more than a 20% nerf / buff in one edit. EVER.
Aeon Amadi Maverick Conflict Solutions 1003	Posted - 2013.01.15 18:29:00 - [15] - Quote Enough people say "nerf it" and their response is justified if not reasonable in their eyes. People don't give feedback, they demand change - CCP did the same exact thing in eve Online until they finally realized, "Okay, maybe we should step back and think about who we're listening to here." The vocal majority is -not- the majority.
DEADPOOL5241 Imperfects Negative-Feedback 231	Posted - 2013.01.15 18:42:00 - [16] - Quote Problem is we have been talking about the same Nerf Hammer problem for a while now. https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=36194 We are working on ways to better communicate with CCP so this does not continue.
crazy space 2100046106 ZionTCD Legacy Rising 879	Posted - 2013.01.15 19:57:00 - [17] - Quote steadyhand amarr wrote: They main complaint is hitting everything at once rather than one thing and see how it affects things yes they should change one thing at a time to go for balance.
crazy space 2100046106 ZionTCD Legacy Rising 879	Posted - 2013.01.15 20:00:00 - [18] - Quote Sha Kharn Clone wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: They main complaint is hitting everything at once rather than one thing and see how it affects things Nail on the head. Its not hard CCP one small tweak at a time dont just mess with every variable you can think of or you learn nothing about the effects of each small change. This is how starcraft was balanced over ten year. Little changes. step back, test change, reverse ones that don't work. Don't very often change 2-3 things at once on a unit. Or is the oracle overpowered? It does too much damage? Increase the build time. Lasers OP? Give protolasers larger ammo so they can overheat as well. Make overheating a mechanic to balance the amazing damage. But ajust it a little at a time, be careful.
Baal Omniscient L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising 248	Posted - 2013.01.16 15:38:00 - [19] - Quote Captain-Awesome wrote: Rename thread to "CCPs Changes Are OP!" I really don't approve of their multi-property changes of an item - it takes longer to get right, takes more attempts, more work and less gain. It's unnecessary, unwanted and illogical should consider this thread a petition. and yes they should at least put votes to the community on what we think should change. give us a poll on whether items should be increased 0-10 (0 being no change, 10 being VERY big change) for example "complaints about HMG being too accurate, vote now: 0 - no change 1 - 2% reduction 2 - 4% reduction 3 - 6% reduction 4 - 8% reduction 5 - 10% reduction 6 - 12% reduction 7 - 14% reduction 8 - 16% reduction 9 - 18% reduction 10 - 20% reduction nothing should ever get more than a 20% nerf / buff in one edit. EVER. Idk about accuracy, I can handle that. Now if we're talking max RANGE, then I'd vote f'n 10. Once that HMG has some sharpshooter skills, that thing gets STUPIDLY OP.
Captain-Awesome Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 349	Posted - 2013.01.16 18:43:00 - [20] - Quote Baal Omniscient wrote: Captain-Awesome wrote: Rename thread to "CCPs Changes Are OP!" I really don't approve of their multi-property changes of an item - it takes longer to get right, takes more attempts, more work and less gain. It's unnecessary, unwanted and illogical should consider this thread a petition. and yes they should at least put votes to the community on what we think should change. give us a poll on whether items should be increased 0-10 (0 being no change, 10 being VERY big change) for example "complaints about HMG being too accurate, vote now: 0 - no change 1 - 2% reduction 2 - 4% reduction 3 - 6% reduction 4 - 8% reduction 5 - 10% reduction 6 - 12% reduction 7 - 14% reduction 8 - 16% reduction 9 - 18% reduction 10 - 20% reduction nothing should ever get more than a 20% nerf / buff in one edit. EVER. Idk about accuracy, I can handle that. Now if we're talking max RANGE, then I'd vote f'n 10. Once that HMG has some sharpshooter skills, that thing gets STUPIDLY OP. was just an example.

Cyn Bruin Imperfects Negative-Feedback 651	Posted - 2013.01.16 18:51:00 - [21] - Quote If we search back on posts like these you will notice they stretch back to Replication. I brought up this same topic 6 months ago or so? They apparently have their own way of doing things at CCP and don't think they need to change. This is CCP's first FPS, we (beta testers) have been playing FPS's for years if not decades. I think alot of the community gives great feedback based on this experience. I have no idea who is on their internal team with FPS experience, but I hope they will eventually listen to masses and do small changes, not game breaking HUGE changes.
DUST Fiend Immobile Infantry 1899	Posted - 2013.01.16 19:24:00 - [22] - Quote At the end of the day, they're making the game, not us. A LOT of players feel that they're the authority on such matters because they're "good" or they "know the game". The sad fact of the matter is, even if they DID know a lot, they aren't on the payroll. They aren't part of CCP games. They aren't on the DUST project. I'm not making this game, and I'm not being paid for my opinion, so I think it's not only selfish, but childish, to expect CCP to suddenly bend over and listen to every word I have to say. No, the compile feedback, make their changes, put it out, rinse and repeat. If you don't like it, too damn bad.
Piercing Serenity Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz RISE of LEGION 181	Posted - 2013.01.16 20:00:00 - [23] - Quote Captain-Awesome wrote: Rename thread to "CCPs Changes Are OP!" I really don't approve of their multi-property changes of an item - it takes longer to get right, takes more attempts, more work and less gain. It's unnecessary, unwanted and illogical should consider this thread a petition. and yes they should at least put votes to the community on what we think should change. give us a poll on whether items should be increased 0-10 (0 being no change, 10 being VERY big change) for example "complaints about HMG being too accurate, vote now: 0 - no change 1 - 2% reduction 2 - 4% reduction 3 - 6% reduction 4 - 8% reduction 5 - 10% reduction 6 - 12% reduction 7 - 14% reduction 8 - 16% reduction 9 - 18% reduction 10 - 20% reduction nothing should ever get more than a 20% nerf / buff in one edit. EVER. In principle, I agree with this thread. CCP has developed a heavy hand when it comes to balancing DUST. I attribute some of the problem to CCP itself (The legacy they've carried from EVE), a second part to the novelty of an FPS to a company specialized in developing MMORPGs, and a final part to the vocal majority alluded to earlier in this thread. In practice, it is very difficult to make balancing more "transparent" if you will, particularly with the F2P nature of DUST. Consider Captian Awesome's proposal for a felicity scale - a measure of how much the player base would like a particular change. This is a good idea in theory, but a very tricky one to implement. My first few questions would be: "How would anyone know what a 20% reduction would look like?" "What options do I have to preview the difference between a two percent nerf and a four percent nerf?" "Should CCP use percentages? Percentages can be very off putting if used incorrectly. A 90% buff to the damage an SMG bullet does sounds like a lot, when it is actually a very small change in damage." "How does CCP target the people who would actually be effected by this change? Dropship pilots, HAV users, and Snipers (presumably) have less personal interactions with HMGs. How should their opinions be weighted?" "As a follow-up question to the one above, how would CCP be able to figure out which players were heavies, assaults, scouts, etc?" "What if people made alts to rig the polls?" And so on and so on... Developing greater self control, more open minds, and more moderate suggestions is our most powerful tool against these heavy-handed nerfs. I believe that we must become the change we wish to see. Some might brand me naive or foolish to expect an internet community to become more moderate. However, I am hopeful that some players more influential than myself will take this message and ones like it to heart and start generating the changes we all would like. Our next best option is more organized suggestions using all avenues of communication. Creating an unofficial DUST government (Similar to EVE's CSM) could be used to ask organized questions with more 'reasonable' responses. This group could make statements after pouring over the forums, discussing the issues internally, and posting a statement afterwards. The beginnings of this have already been started, with player made reports on balancing happening between Beta members and CCP Devs. Additionally, IRC chat is available to everyone, and should be utilized by everyone. If we are serious about changing the way CCP handles balancing, then we must speak through every channel available to us. These suggestions are not nonnegotiable or even right. They are just to add to the pool of ideas on how we can make the game better for everyone PS Reason for edit: Copy and pasted the last sentence into the wrong document. Fixed now
Elijah Sol' Dzusaki Onward Defrosted Tuna Team 485	Posted - 2013.01.16 20:05:00 - [24] - Quote I really hate people who believe they are entitled to stuff like this.
arimal lavaren L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising 186	Posted - 2013.01.16 20:13:00 - [25] - Quote Elijah Sol' Dzusaki wrote: I really hate people who believe they are entitled to stuff like this. Sorry but you seem to have missed the point of the thread, not that some dusters should be the authority on balance but that it is unwise and illogical to do so in such a wide sweeping manner. As some one said a page or so back, CCP needs to treat dust a little more lady like.
Baal Omniscient L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising 248	Posted - 2013.01.17 12:51:00 - [26] - Quote Captain-Awesome wrote: Baal Omniscient wrote: Captain-Awesome wrote: Rename thread to "CCPs Changes Are OP!" I really don't approve of their multi-property changes of an item - it takes longer to get right, takes more attempts, more work and less gain. It's unnecessary, unwanted and illogical should consider this thread a petition. and yes they should at least put votes to the community on what we think should change. give us a poll on whether items should be increased 0-10 (0 being no change, 10 being VERY big change) for example "complaints about HMG being too accurate, vote now: 0 - no change 1 - 2% reduction 2 - 4% reduction 3 - 6% reduction 4 - 8% reduction 5 - 10% reduction 6 - 12% reduction 7 - 14% reduction 8 - 16% reduction 9 - 18% reduction 10 - 20% reduction nothing should ever get more than a 20% nerf / buff in one edit. EVER. Idk about accuracy, I can handle that. Now if we're talking max RANGE, then I'd vote f'n 10. Once that HMG has some sharpshooter skills, that thing gets STUPIDLY OP. was just an example. I know. But it presented me a semi-legit reason to bump the thread.
KEROSIINI-TERO Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 248	Posted - 2013.01.17 16:01:00 - [27] - Quote I agree and been wondering the same.
Fivetimes Infinity Immobile Infantry 1086	Posted - 2013.01.17 18:43:00 - [28] - Quote Baal Omniscient wrote: I doubt anyone from CCP will officially respond, but I want to know why it is that CCP refuses to bounce ideas within the community about how to change things. Get feedback on ideas they have to make the game batter rather than taking a bunch of random feedback on the topic and patching together a giant nerf IED. It's probably because they're smarter than 99.99% of the people in the community when it comes to game design. Very, very rarely something worth anything will show up on these forums, but it's all mostly junk. So why would they waste their time soliciting the opinions of people who lack the ability to reflect on the game objectively?
Baal Omniscient L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising 248	Posted - 2013.01.17 20:01:00 - [29] - Quote Fivetimes Infinity wrote: Baal Omniscient wrote: I doubt anyone from CCP will officially respond, but I want to know why it is that CCP refuses to bounce ideas within the community about how to change things. Get feedback on ideas they have to make the game batter rather than taking a bunch of random feedback on the topic and patching together a giant nerf IED. It's probably because they're smarter than 99.99% of the people in the community when it comes to game design. Very, very rarely something worth anything will show up on these forums, but it's all mostly junk. So why would they waste their time soliciting the opinions of people who lack the ability to reflect on the game objectively? But not smarter that 99% of the community when it comes to FPS gameplay elements and fundamentals. Yes, they have the technical knowledge to make things and have them work in game, but on balancing issues they fall far short in their knowledge. And as a community, there have been plenty of ideas bounced among ourselves that have been spectacular. Tossing out ideas, seeing what percentage of the community likes one means of implementing a mechanic over another, polling the players on how much they should adjust certain parameters, gauging answers and arguments on different sides of settings and function changes, all of this would allow them to have a better grasp on FPS building as well as give us the opportunity to actively participate. It would be mutually beneficial. Also, it would be far better than responding to requests to fix things by changing how they function entirely.
KalOfTheRathi CowTek 168	Posted - 2013.01.17 22:38:00 - [30] - Quote Baal Omniscient wrote: My point in writing this all out is to ask you "Why do they do this?" Because they can. Lulz.



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.