| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Oswald Rehnquist
Abandoned Privilege
General Tso's Alliance
47
   |
Posted - 2013.07.05 22:38:00 -
[1] - Quote
Examples of Weapons Mechanics
1) overheat management
2) Headshots required to do any real damage
3) Weapons that require a charge before firing
4) Unusual arc properties that go beyond linear point and click
5) Difficult/Unique range limitations
6) Strong Recoil
Etc
Since even the lowest common denominators among us are able to understand the balance between exertion and successful outcomes. It is unsurprising to see that the weapon classes that take the least amount of player skill are the most popular. One of the reason why I think people are happy with the oddly speedy strafing speed despite how silly it looks (especially being practically the same speed for all suits) is because it actually added a player skill mechanic for everyone to utilize.
This is not to say that there are zero skill weapons, but the sheer discrepancy of skill development required is hard to miss, and the only skill visible for certain weapons is psychological, movement and positioning management, which we all partake in.
Weapons with no mechanic to learn and improve on with a simple philosophy of "aim for the general area around the feet" or "point and click at a foe a quarter across the map" are what I believe make some matches slightly stale.
Many of the more popular FPS games get around this by the fact that any weapon drops you in less than 2 seconds whether it be a pistol or an assault Rifle. While dust should not follow suit, it does then need to compensate for not applying that easy fix and develop mechanism for players to learn so we can see differences.
It has already done this for many of the weapons in game, but the main point that I am getting to is that I think instead of nerfing numbers, they should up the player skill required to play with the weapon. This is as it is implied for current imbalances and possible future ones. It can also be used as a tool to diversify Dust a little bit more.
Any thoughts on this? Or even other mechanics that I have missed? |
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
889
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 22:41:00 -
[2] - Quote
Why is it that helmets suck so bad in the future? |
Oswald Rehnquist
Abandoned Privilege
General Tso's Alliance
47
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 22:44:00 -
[3] - Quote
Buster Friently wrote:Why is it that helmets suck so bad in the future?
I would image that offensive technology always had an edge over defensive technology for the sheer reason why the strongest gun can still penetrate the strongest body armor, which is the case in our time as well. |
Scheneighnay McBob
Bojo's School of the Trades
1912
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 22:54:00 -
[4] - Quote
ARs used to need some skill, but players bitched, as usual.
Everything else seems to require a decent amount of skill in some way or another |
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
889
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 23:02:00 -
[5] - Quote
Oswald Rehnquist wrote:Buster Friently wrote:Why is it that helmets suck so bad in the future? I would image that offensive technology always had an edge over defensive technology for the sheer reason why the strongest gun can still penetrate the strongest body armor, which is the case in our time as well.
True enough, but the helmet, even in today's world, is the strongest piece of body armor. Right? |
Meeko Fent
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
147
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 23:22:00 -
[6] - Quote
Buster Friently wrote:Oswald Rehnquist wrote:Buster Friently wrote:Why is it that helmets suck so bad in the future? I would image that offensive technology always had an edge over defensive technology for the sheer reason why the strongest gun can still penetrate the strongest body armor, which is the case in our time as well. True enough, but the helmet, even in today's world, is the strongest piece of body armor. Right?
A 60 year old 8mm Mauser can go through and through the latest Kevlar helmet. |
Vyzion Eyri
The Southern Legion
RISE of LEGION
805
|
Posted - 2013.07.05 23:37:00 -
[7] - Quote
Because developing armour is limited by the human body. How do we fit something around a soldier to maximise protection and still have decent mobility?
How do we protect the head, yet still allow those functions such as hearing, speech, sight and even smell be retained?
What are the costs of artificially reproducing the senses the body already has, just for extra protection?
There are dozens more factors, but I'm damn sure there are less for weapons.
Directly applying balanced mechanics to make weapons 'take skill' will be challenging. It will also be time consuming.
I think for now, CCP should focus on what they've been doing currently, and simply continue expanding the game and stengthening the core.
In this way, instead of limiting the range of scenarios where a weapon may be effective even if you have some skill with it, we instead expand the number of possible scenarios an individual can find him or herself in, and this changes how effective a certain weapon is overall.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |