DUST Search - [Feedback] Weapon damage flattening

Tiel Syysch wrote:

Now that we're in open beta and I'm not going to get yelled at for linking a spreadsheet, I would like to bring this back into the spotlight.

I made a handy spreadsheet to showcase the result of the weapon damage flattening. The numbers listed are bullets it takes to kill the various HP levels shown at the top.

I personally feel this is a bad direction to be taking weapon damage across tiers. The incentive to use a higher level gun is being diminished, and this occurs across all levels of SP investment and even occurs with the use of damage mods. There is much more of an effect across SP investment and the use of damage mods (than there is using a higher tier weapon), and the overall result is it doesn't really matter what weapon you use; the time to kill is so close between standard and prototype that in many cases it's negligible (and the sacrifice of fitting space to use the prototype weapon would be better spent elsewhere, making the prototype weapon useless).

For quick comparisons, and those who don't want to click the link, here's the bullet difference between standard and prototype weapons, from 300 to 1000 hp in increments of 100.

Current AR values:

At base damage: 1-1-2-2-2-2-3-3
At max SP investment: 1-1-1-2-1*-2-2-2
At max SP + 2 damage mods: 1-1-1-1-1-2-2-2

Using old AR values, we get:

At base damage: 2-2-3-4-4-4-5-6
At max SP investment: 1-2-3-2*-3-4-4-5
At max SP + 2 damage mods: 1-1-2-2-3-3-3-4

*probably a fluke with hp values chosen that one value just barely doesn't make its difference 1 higher

Current HMG values:

At base damage: 1-3-3-3-4-5-5-6
At max SP investment: 1-1-2-2-3-3-4-4
At max SP + 2 damage mods: 1-1-2-2-3-3-4-4

Using old HMG values, we get:

At base damage: 3-5-5-6-7-9-10-10
At max SP investment: 2-3-4-5-6-6-7-8
At max SP + 2 damage mods: 2-3-3-4-5-6-6-7

The ARs, while not hugely different than before, almost never reach a point where it's more than a 2 bullet difference with current values to kill anybody from 300 to 1000 hp. The HMGs show a vast difference and highlight the direction these differences are heading. The incentive to upgrade to a higher tier weapon is diminishing with the damage flattening. There are some weapons and variants that have added bonuses such as better accuracy and faster fire rate that come with upgrades, but for the majority of weapons, they have this problem.

I personally would like to see SP removed from the damage equation, have passive bonuses be things that improve target acquisition rather than target destruction, and also broaden the gap in weapon base damage to incentivize upgrading.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Mobius Wyvern BetaMax. 1216	Posted - 2013.01.24 20:13:00 - [1] - Quote Tiel Syysch wrote: Now that we're in open beta and I'm not going to get yelled at for linking a spreadsheet, I would like to bring this back into the spotlight. I made a handy spreadsheet to showcase the result of the weapon damage flattening. The numbers listed are bullets it takes to kill the various HP levels shown at the top. I personally feel this is a bad direction to be taking weapon damage across tiers. The incentive to use a higher level gun is being diminished, and this occurs across all levels of SP investment and even occurs with the use of damage mods. There is much more of an effect across SP investment and the use of damage mods (than there is using a higher tier weapon), and the overall result is it doesn't really matter what weapon you use; the time to kill is so close between standard and prototype that in many cases it's negligible (and the sacrifice of fitting space to use the prototype weapon would be better spent elsewhere, making the prototype weapon useless). For quick comparisons, and those who don't want to click the link, here's the bullet difference between standard and prototype weapons, from 300 to 1000 hp in increments of 100. Current AR values: At base damage: 1-1-2-2-2-2-3-3 At max SP investment: 1-1-1-2-1-2-2-2 At max SP + 2 damage mods: 1-1-1-1-1-2-2-2 Using old AR values, we get: At base damage: 2-2-3-4-4-4-5-6 At max SP investment: 1-2-3-2-3-4-4-5 At max SP + 2 damage mods: 1-1-2-2-3-3-3-4 probably a fluke with hp values chosen that one value just barely doesn't make its difference 1 higher Current HMG values: At base damage: 1-3-3-3-4-5-5-6 At max SP investment: 1-1-2-2-3-3-4-4 At max SP + 2 damage mods: 1-1-2-2-3-3-4-4 Using old HMG values, we get: At base damage: 3-5-5-6-7-9-10-10 At max SP investment: 2-3-4-5-6-6-7-8 At max SP + 2 damage mods: 2-3-3-4-5-6-6-7 The ARs, while not hugely* different than before, almost never reach a point where it's more than a 2 bullet difference with current values to kill anybody from 300 to 1000 hp. The HMGs show a vast difference and highlight the direction these differences are heading. The incentive to upgrade to a higher tier weapon is diminishing with the damage flattening. There are some weapons and variants that have added bonuses such as better accuracy and faster fire rate that come with upgrades, but for the majority of weapons, they have this problem. I personally would like to see SP removed from the damage equation, have passive bonuses be things that improve target acquisition rather than target destruction, and also broaden the gap in weapon base damage to incentivize upgrading. Yes, the initial flattening smacks of something done to achieve better balance in High-Sec matchmaking, where you shouldn't be using your Proto gear anyway due to the expense involved. It really does seem like most of these people calling for nerfs left and right are driven entirely by this irrational fear of pubstomping, which doesn't make any sense in this game. Sure, you can bring in the big stuff, but if you die even once you're going negative for the whole match. This is NO need to work game design around this irrational and unfounded fear. I'm in favor of opening the damage gaps back up, and even buffing Proto suits back up so that you at least get some HP bonus for upgrading instead of just slots and fitting.