|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
384
   |
Posted - 2013.05.10 16:19:00 -
[1] - Quote
I see that most of the posts on the forums here relate to nerf requests of whatever the I-don't-like-it-flavor-of-the-day here, and that lots of people are calling things OP. Most of these threads, not all, but most of these threads amount to crybabies begging their mamma for a cookie.
The thing is, I don't think most of you even understand the concept of OP, so I'm about to educate you.
Let's dig into the concept of OP a bit here. OP, or overpowered, seems pretty straight forward as a concept, right? If something is OP, it's unbalanced, it's too good. The problem is, this is the extend of many people's logic capabilities, and they never ask the real question.
What does it matter if something is OP? We can really only define the true meaning of OP by answering this question. For example, each weapon should have it's niche where it is more powerful than other, or each suit, gameplay variety, etc. Does this mean that everything is OP because they have a niche they dominate? Certainly not, but this is where many forum posters get tripped up and come to the forum asking for changes to things they don't understand.
So, again, what does it matter if something is OP, or unbalanced? Well, it matters because if something is unbalanced, then players will flock to the 'exploit' the 'flavor of the month' etc. Well, why does this matter? If every player adapts to one role, or weapon, or playstyle, then that makes the game more shallow. This means that there is no longer room for people to enjoy a game in many different ways from many different perspectives.
So, Point 1 - For something to be OP it must damage diversity.
Ok, next obvious question. Why does it matter if diversity is damaged? Well, as is alluded to above, when diversity is damaged, the game becomes less deep. It becomes easier, it becomes less interesting, and it becomes more boring. This means that the game has less capability to attract an audience and thus, less capability to be successful.
None of us want to play a stale, boring game right? Naturally devs don't want a stale boring game, because it won't keep them in business. Making a game costs a lot of money and time, and time is put into each and every detail of the game. If many of those details are being passed over because they are useless in comparison to the OPness of something else, this, ultimately affects the bottom line of the company. Making money is the entire point of the company, without money, the company will not exist, and thus the game will not exist.
So, Point 2 - Diversity (balance) brings money, and money makes a game (company) successful
For those who have managed to keep up, grats, we're almost done. Back to the definition of OP. Now that we know the reasoning behind why it matters if something is OP, we can finally address what it means to be OP, and thus quantifiably identify what is OP and what is not.
[b]Final Point - For something to be OP, it must be out competing the other items. It must be dominating in terms of numbers, thus reducing the complexity and diversity of the game, thus making the game less desirable[/b]
Now informed, you can easily determine, objectively, what is, or is not OP, by simply recording it's numerical dominance in the game. If it is only being used by a minority of players, or in a minority of play styles, it cannot be OP. Conversely, that which might be being overused and dominating the game in terms of usage, is, by definition OP.
Please be aware of what OP means before you post here asking for a cookie. |
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
384
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 17:21:00 -
[2] - Quote
Vsor wrote:OP to me is what children yell when they die in a game that allows a choice of setup. Also a TL;DR would have been nice.
I thought about a tl;dr, but I figured the bolded, underlined points should suffice even though they aren't explicitly labeled as tl;dr. |
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
384
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 17:55:00 -
[3] - Quote
Yes, all good points as well.
Too bad CCP won't sticky these as gentle reminders |
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
386
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 20:07:00 -
[4] - Quote
Bump because I spent some time and thought on this. |
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
405
|
Posted - 2013.05.12 01:50:00 -
[5] - Quote
13 pages down. Bump. |
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
826
|
Posted - 2013.06.30 23:05:00 -
[6] - Quote
Bump because clearly many of you weren't around for the original, and have no idea how to tell what is actually OP.
|
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
826
|
Posted - 2013.06.30 23:16:00 -
[7] - Quote
XeroTheBigBoss wrote:I am still new to this but am learning from SoTa. You sit here and claim to know the difference between identifying what is OP and what is fine. Buster Friently wrote:XeroTheBigBoss wrote:Are you guys aware of how godlike it is? Is there plans to nerf it down a little bit? It's getting to the point where people are just running around using nothing else specially in the Planetary Conquest that was suppose to bring Longevity to the game. Nobody will want to go up against full teams of guys using Rapid fire grenade launchers that are more than capable of killing with splash damage. The gun is fine. Your logic seems flawed.
If you actually read the post, I think you would see that my logic isn't flawed, though you may disagree.
Personally, I count you among the many AR tards that believe their past experience twiddling tiny joysticks qualifies them to comment on things that they know nothing about, like the Flaylock.
Having said that, I don't do PC. So if you are going to say something about Flaylocks and PC, perhaps you should qualify that the problem, among many, is PC. Even if this hyperbolic characterization of PC is true, which I highly doubt, PC represents such a small fraction of the playerbase and games that it is hardly worth mentioning. However, one man's voice, or child's as in your case, doesn't constitute facts. Luckily, CCP can run the numbers of which I speak and determine the OPness of anything they want, all sans forum whining by the likes of you. |
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
826
|
Posted - 2013.06.30 23:23:00 -
[8] - Quote
XeroTheBigBoss wrote:Buster Friently wrote:XeroTheBigBoss wrote:I am still new to this but am learning from SoTa. You sit here and claim to know the difference between identifying what is OP and what is fine. Buster Friently wrote:XeroTheBigBoss wrote:Are you guys aware of how godlike it is? Is there plans to nerf it down a little bit? It's getting to the point where people are just running around using nothing else specially in the Planetary Conquest that was suppose to bring Longevity to the game. Nobody will want to go up against full teams of guys using Rapid fire grenade launchers that are more than capable of killing with splash damage. The gun is fine. Your logic seems flawed. If you actually read the post, I think you would see that my logic isn't flawed, though you may disagree. Personally, I count you among the many AR tards that believe their past experience twiddling tiny joysticks qualifies them to comment on things that they know nothing about, like the Flaylock. Having said that, I don't do PC. So if you are going to say something about Flaylocks and PC, perhaps you should qualify that the problem, among many, is PC. Even if this hyperbolic characterization of PC is true, which I highly doubt, PC represents such a small fraction of the playerbase and games that it is hardly worth mentioning. However, one man's voice, or child's as in your case, doesn't constitute facts. Luckily, CCP can run the numbers of which I speak and determine the OPness of anything they want, all sans forum whining by the likes of you. Lol! I use Shotgun! Again, you are just mindless ranting for likes.
Grats. No, far from mindless or like farming. I'm just pointing out the truth around here. It's not my fault that some people like that.
I assumed you play mostly AR because your lack of tactical forethought is usually a harbinger of the AR kings. I guess you're just odd that way.
|
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
826
|
Posted - 2013.06.30 23:33:00 -
[9] - Quote
XeroTheBigBoss wrote:So you are saying the Core flaylock is fine because in the PUBS it's not a problem?
Real question not being trolly. "Are you stupid or something?" PC is where the competitive players are and if it is a problem here what do you think will happen when they all decide to pub?
I pick you for one of those guys that just sit in MCC or hide in back of the map anytime you see a Imperfect or anything on the other side am I right? YUP! So you would never see that Core Flaylock Pistol is a problem anyway because you only play against the new players.
So in other words to you the Core Flaylock Pistol "is fine" Might wanna read your own OP a few times till it rings a bell.
I'll tell you what, I'll entertain this post as though you were actually being serious and not a douche bag.
Question number 1) PC represents a very small userbase. If at some point it becomes a larger base, then their deserves to be more attention paid to it. Right now that isn't the case. Competitive players are not more important than anyone else. Despite their egotistical thoughts, in general, competitive players are actually less important. Right now, the pubs are where new players arrive, and new players are the issue. So, yes, the pubs are far more important for CCP to spend effort on - at this time.
2) Never MCC afkd or ran away and hid in any game in Dust ever. I play, though I may not always win. Also, I see, and engage Proto players all the time. I'm not in PC due to my Corp's size. PC isn't very important right now anyway.
The Core Flaylock is fine. The kill feeds I see (non PC) do not indicate any kind of imbalance favoring the Core, or any other Flaylock. Why don't you put your money where your mouth is - show me a vid of PC that has tons of people using the Core Flaylock, and bonus points if those people aren't on your own corp. |
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
828
|
Posted - 2013.06.30 23:50:00 -
[10] - Quote
XeroTheBigBoss wrote:I really wish I could. I happen to have one. Although it would be taken the wrong way. It's not worth the headache. There is a video though where most the kills are Flaylock pistols. You gotta just look. There will be more upcoming soon. I will favorite this thread and hopefully others would be more willing to post videos.
As far as I'm concerned, what I've posted in the OP in this thread is the only way to determine OPness. Assuming I see convincing evidence that there's a trend in PC that is reducing diversity, and the culprit is the Core Flaylock, then I will side with you immediately that it's a problem in PC.
Until then, I can only go by what I see, and in pub matches, the Flaylocks aren't dominating. |
|
|
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
828
|
Posted - 2013.06.30 23:53:00 -
[11] - Quote
XeroTheBigBoss wrote:Buster Friently wrote:XeroTheBigBoss wrote:I really wish I could. I happen to have one. Although it would be taken the wrong way. It's not worth the headache. There is a video though where most the kills are Flaylock pistols. You gotta just look. There will be more upcoming soon. I will favorite this thread and hopefully others would be more willing to post videos. As far as I'm concerned, what I've posted in the OP in this thread is the only way to determine OPness. Assuming I see convincing evidence that there's a trend in PC that is reducing diversity, and the culprit is the Core Flaylock, then I will side with you immediately that it's a problem in PC. Until then, I can only go by what I see, and in pub matches, the Flaylocks aren't dominating. The trend is just starting. Not many videos yet but the video I have in that one alone there is a lot of flaylock kills. 50+ maybe. It's only the beginning. I will keep the community that do not see Flaylocks as a problem informed using this thread I have favorite it.
OK. I support data collection. Science and objectivity and all that. |
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
828
|
Posted - 2013.07.01 00:02:00 -
[12] - Quote
KEROSIINI-TERO wrote:Buster Friently wrote:
.
.
ORIGINAL POST
.
.
Very good post. I hope people read it and figure out that acronym "OP" really means something over the top. My definition of OP is if the selection to use something is a "no-brainer" then it most likely is OP. Buster gets my +1 for this, However, I disagree on the definition of "if something is very very commonly seen on the field it is OP". I'd imagine a general purpose weapon like AR is okay if is most common weapon (provided it's killing power is balanced to others)
Thanks.
Let me say this. I think the AR fits the bill of a no-brainer. So by your definition, from my viewpoint, it's OP. Also, on a slightly more businesslike approach to the view of OP, the game designers have made a lot of weapons, and if the AR is, say, 50% of those in use, but only 10% of those designed, it is hurting diversity - precisely because it is a no brainer. |
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
828
|
Posted - 2013.07.01 00:07:00 -
[13] - Quote
XeroTheBigBoss wrote:Buster Friently wrote:KEROSIINI-TERO wrote:Buster Friently wrote:
.
.
ORIGINAL POST
.
.
Very good post. I hope people read it and figure out that acronym "OP" really means something over the top. My definition of OP is if the selection to use something is a "no-brainer" then it most likely is OP. Buster gets my +1 for this, However, I disagree on the definition of "if something is very very commonly seen on the field it is OP". I'd imagine a general purpose weapon like AR is okay if is most common weapon (provided it's killing power is balanced to others) Thanks. Let me say this. I think the AR fits the bill of a no-brainer. So by your definition, from my viewpoint, it's OP. Also, on a slightly more businesslike approach to the view of OP, the game designers have made a lot of weapons, and if the AR is, say, 50% of those, it is hurting diversity - precisely because it is a no brainer. I wouldn't say AR is OP because so many people kill with it. You gotta think AR is the most popular gun because it has been in every single shooter since the beginning of time and is the most basic weapon. Most people know what they are gonna get with a AR. Nobody knows what to expect from Scrambler Laser Shotgun and all the others. AR can be used in every situation.
I agree that this is a complication with the AR.
Personally though, I think this merely skews the point at which you declare it OP. What, precisely, that point is, I don't know.
By your reckoning, if the AR is 90% of the weapons on the battlefield, is it OP then, even though it's the "comfort" weapon? Or is 75% the break point?
All I'm saying is there is such a break point, even for the AR. |
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
828
|
Posted - 2013.07.01 01:12:00 -
[14] - Quote
Xender17 wrote:Only agree with the 3rd point. 1&2 have no meaning to gameplay. Gameplay is the only area a weapon has affect.
If I understand what you're saying, let me counter with: 1 and 2 define 3. |
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
1477
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 00:16:00 -
[15] - Quote
For those of you still confused. |
|
|
| |
|