Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kane Fyea
DUST University Ivy League
594
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 22:20:00 -
[31] - Quote
Buster Friently wrote:Kane Fyea wrote:Buster Friently wrote:Marston VC wrote:1.) SMG's in my opinion are overpowered (especially the proto version) HOWEVER this weapon has missed out on the nerf hammer because it's an under used weapon. It doesn't get reallllyyy good until you have the ishukone assault SMG with proficiency 4 or 5 so most people aren't willing to make that kind of investment. But that thing is literally the breach rifle on steroids. (in that it has the same range as the breach AR) but it shoots out FAR more bullets. Especially now with the range buffs to every gun. Seriously..... that thing is sooooo good and nobody besides me and some other vets have actually specced into them.
2.) The flaylock pistol IS OP, HOWEVER it is also a niche weapon. Some people don't like it because of a three round clip, others don't like it because it can do damage back, but nobody can deny that three of those rounds at your feet will kill you. I mean..... 200 splash damage??? really?? ffs man! It does better then actual missile launchers :/ and the real problem is with minmatar assaults running around with dual proto flaylocks! that coupled with the fact that weapon swap speed was increased makes it so that the flaylock pistol is practically a better version of the mass driver. Only it costs the same as a sidearm..... (isk/fitting wise).
3.) The fact that both of these weapons are above Scrambler rifles speak wonders. Sure! They have less kills in four matches then some of the more established and prominent guns in game, but at the end of the day that doesn't change them from being OP or Not OP. I mean..... the scrambler rifle is the answer to shield tanking, yet assault rifles are used more, and that's simply because its the most familiar weapon people see when coming into this game. Therefore people prefer them, therefore they are more common, therefore other weapons are less common, therefore people can get upset if they die from weapons there not used to dying from.
What would have been far more interesting is to post up the amount of instances each player in all four matches carried their specific weapons. There could have been 5 flaylock users in each match, but if only 1 or 2 of them got any kills that's all were seeing right now.
And even if it turns out there isn't that many users to specific guns, that too does not prove its balanced. Back in closed beta Tanks = god mode. CCP made them incredibly hard to kill so as to test out how people would react. They were the most overpowered thing this game has ever had. (imagine a tank that could tank 13 standard forge gun shots before its shields were gone). HOWEVER not everyone used them! In fact, its pretty easy to say only a majority of people specced into tanks at that time. I mean if there was 4 tanks per match that build, there was still 12 other people who didn't use them. The fact of the matter issssss
Preference > Weapon effectiveness
People will play more with what they enjoy rather then what is better at killing. This does not mean OP weapons like the Flaylock pistol don't exist, it just means that most people prefer not to use a gun as gimmicky as that. Having a niche, by definition, means the weapon is capable of killing in it's preferred role, but not outside of it. This is made plainly clear by the numbers. The Flaylock has a niche, but is not OP. The SMG, is also, less OP than the generalist weapon of the AR even considering that the AR is a "comfort weapon" for most players. Having said that, the AR represents more than twice the number of kills ans the next highest light weapon. That, my friend, is the definition of OP. The fact that more people carry it is just more evidence. No it's because the AR is the go to weapon in any shooter. If the weapon was underpowered though, they would migrate out of it to something else. Clearly this isn't happening. Thus, people stay with it because it's very effective. Too effective. OP in fact. It's because it's a general use weapon. It is the most flexible. It is also the first weapon noobs go to usually. When something kills fine and you already have it then why go to a different weapon?
Just because many people use a weapon does not mean it's OP. This is coming from a SCR user BTW. (Also I didn't say it was UP) |
ZDub 303
TeamPlayers EoN.
622
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 22:23:00 -
[32] - Quote
Buster Friently wrote:ZDub 303 wrote:All i'm gonna say is... I hope CCP knows now not to balance weapons by their use in public matches, and instead by their use in organized corp matches (see planetary conquest).
Planetary conquest represent a tiny minority of the Dust playerbase, and as such, is relatively insignificant when it comes to balancing concerns. At such time that more players are able to be involved with PC, then I agree wholeheartedly.
That's a really archaic way of balancing pvp games unfortunately.
CCP could learn a thing or two from Starcraft 2. That game is balanced entirely around professional play, which represents an extremely small count players (far less %-wise than dust and PC).
Weapons need to be balanced against how they are used by highly skilled players, then the effects can trickle down into the less skilled playerbase. Its the only way to truly balance weapons consistently against eachother.
Balancing by "number of kills per match" is completely pointless. Primarily due the complete lack of ability to respec. Given unlimited respecs, the numbers would probably change drastically. However... this game has extremely slow progression in unlocking new weaponry, which makes metrics like this extremely slow to come to light. the only reason everyone was using the tac back when it was OP was because it was already an AR.
It takes a full two weeks of unboosted SP to get Op 5 and prof. 1 in a weapon. People aren't going to make choices like that lightly.
The number one thing I hear right now from the more skilled players in EoN?
"The FP is ridiculously OP, however I really don't want to waste 600k SP in a gun that will clearly be recieving an astronomical nerf soon"
my close buddy spec'd into FP Op 5, just to test it out, since he's pretty much maxed in ARs and thats the only gun he cares to use. His thoughts on it?
"the flaylock is stupid OP, I can't wait for it to be nerfed into the ground so I don't have to use it anymore and I can go back to the SMG, which I prefer"
So no... You can continue your troll crusade Buster... most of us know you have no clue what you're talking about. Your FOTM OP weapon will be nerfed into the ground, no matter how hard you try to keep your crutch. |
BL4CKST4R
WarRavens League of Infamy
436
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 22:24:00 -
[33] - Quote
Buster Friently wrote:BL4CKST4R wrote:Buster Friently wrote:So, I've seen, and commented on, the typical "it's not AR so nerf it posts" and have tried to explain that just because something kills you, but isn't an AR, that doesn't mean it's OP. I've implored people to check out the killfeed so they can see, themselves, which weapons are dominating the game. Knowing that most players won't bother, but will continue to champion their own little cause, I've done it for you. I have compiled the killfeed from four skirmish games today in which I dropped alone. I removed my own kills from the tally. If you'd like, I can let you know what those are. Here are the results: Totals for all four matches combined: Assault Rifle 100 Turrets 65 Sniper Rifle 44 HMG 37 Impact 35 SMG 34 Grenades 27 Misc 26 Mass Driver 20 Flaylock 16 Scrambler Rifle 13 Strike 12 Shotgun 10 Swarm Launcher 8 Forge Gun 5 Laser Rifle 5 Melee 1 RE 1 Unknown 1 Scrambler Pistol Plasma Cannon Nova Knives Now, what can be learned from this. First off, it is clear that all the forum whining regarding Flaylock pistols is just that - whining. It is just number 10 on the killfeed, behind grenades, and significantly - far behind the SMG, another sidearm. We can also see that players should probably consider carrying more AV, considering impact kills are number 5, and turrets (comprising installations and all vehicle turrets together) are number 2. Most significantly, the most OP weapon on the battlefield, representing nearly 22% of all kills in Dust, is the AR. The next highest handheld weapon, the sniper rifle comes in at just 9% of overall kills. The much maligned Flaylock clocks in at less than 3.5% of all kills. If anyone is interested in the raw data per fight, it is here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Avo42h0_YoMNdEtzNWk4UWRENTRnWVpkQjZJQXhJUGc&usp=sharingNow, before anyone jumps on and says why haven't I broken down this data into individual weapons, run more games, etc. I'm sorry. I'd like too, but I don't have video recording equipment, so I had my GF help by tallying all the kills in realtime, so sorry, this is as detailed as I can get. This doesn't represent "OP ness" it represents weapon preference. No, not really, please see: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=75585
But it really doesn't... the AR is just an easy weapon to use, and it is the weapons players are most comfortable using because it is the weapon most FPS players know how to use. The sniper rifle is another weapon that is very easy and comfortable to use, because we as FPS players know what it does. Now look at your list, the more the weapon diverges from what is commonly used in a FPS the lower it is in the list. Now there are some hiccups to that, because there are weapons in the list that are just extremely weak. But look at the top 5 weapons; AR, SR, HMG, SMG, and grenades. These weapons are easily recognizable in any FPS and thus most players will specialize into them since by the name we know exactly how they work.
Making such a list and use it to represent how OP a weapon is does not cut it, specially in a game like Dust were you cannot switch weapons on the fly. What would make this list more accurate is if weapons required no to specialization to use and thus the most OP weapon could be switched into whenever the user "feels" like it.
|
Sloth9230
Reaper Galactic
2156
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 22:26:00 -
[34] - Quote
ZDub 303 wrote:Your FOTM OP weapon will be nerfed into the ground Are you paying attention CCP? No one in your player base expects reasonable nerfs, that's just sad |
Marston VC
SVER True Blood Public Disorder.
440
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 22:30:00 -
[35] - Quote
Buster Friently wrote:Marston VC wrote:1.) SMG's in my opinion are overpowered (especially the proto version) HOWEVER this weapon has missed out on the nerf hammer because it's an under used weapon. It doesn't get reallllyyy good until you have the ishukone assault SMG with proficiency 4 or 5 so most people aren't willing to make that kind of investment. But that thing is literally the breach rifle on steroids. (in that it has the same range as the breach AR) but it shoots out FAR more bullets. Especially now with the range buffs to every gun. Seriously..... that thing is sooooo good and nobody besides me and some other vets have actually specced into them.
2.) The flaylock pistol IS OP, HOWEVER it is also a niche weapon. Some people don't like it because of a three round clip, others don't like it because it can do damage back, but nobody can deny that three of those rounds at your feet will kill you. I mean..... 200 splash damage??? really?? ffs man! It does better then actual missile launchers :/ and the real problem is with minmatar assaults running around with dual proto flaylocks! that coupled with the fact that weapon swap speed was increased makes it so that the flaylock pistol is practically a better version of the mass driver. Only it costs the same as a sidearm..... (isk/fitting wise).
3.) The fact that both of these weapons are above Scrambler rifles speak wonders. Sure! They have less kills in four matches then some of the more established and prominent guns in game, but at the end of the day that doesn't change them from being OP or Not OP. I mean..... the scrambler rifle is the answer to shield tanking, yet assault rifles are used more, and that's simply because its the most familiar weapon people see when coming into this game. Therefore people prefer them, therefore they are more common, therefore other weapons are less common, therefore people can get upset if they die from weapons there not used to dying from.
What would have been far more interesting is to post up the amount of instances each player in all four matches carried their specific weapons. There could have been 5 flaylock users in each match, but if only 1 or 2 of them got any kills that's all were seeing right now.
And even if it turns out there isn't that many users to specific guns, that too does not prove its balanced. Back in closed beta Tanks = god mode. CCP made them incredibly hard to kill so as to test out how people would react. They were the most overpowered thing this game has ever had. (imagine a tank that could tank 13 standard forge gun shots before its shields were gone). HOWEVER not everyone used them! In fact, its pretty easy to say only a majority of people specced into tanks at that time. I mean if there was 4 tanks per match that build, there was still 12 other people who didn't use them. The fact of the matter issssss
Preference > Weapon effectiveness
People will play more with what they enjoy rather then what is better at killing. This does not mean OP weapons like the Flaylock pistol don't exist, it just means that most people prefer not to use a gun as gimmicky as that. Having a niche, by definition, means the weapon is capable of killing in it's preferred role, but not outside of it. This is made plainly clear by the numbers. The Flaylock has a niche, but is not OP. The SMG, is also, less OP than the generalist weapon of the AR even considering that the AR is a "comfort weapon" for most players. Having said that, the AR represents more than twice the number of kills as the next highest light weapon. That, my friend, is the definition of OP. The fact that more people carry it is just more evidence.
Seriously??? The whole point I wrote all of that was to try and drive this 1 point home........ JUST BECAUSE a weapon ISN'T used as often as another DOES NOT mean its not OP........ I used the word "niche" to try and explain why people don't use it as much, and its hard to come up with another word that would fit the same role. But the weapon is NOT OP because so many people use it, the weapon is OP BECAUSE it's TOO effective in its "niche"
Trust me, I tried defending the laser rifle as much as I could last build because it was my only specced into weapon (aside from the SMG) And now that its been nerfed and I look back on what I was doing with it..... that **** was OP, LOL the fact that I could use it as an assault rifle (with damage mods) is proof that it wasn't being used as intended. The fact that Flaylock pistols can be used as a substitute for a mass driver, OR many primary weapons in general is Proof that its OP.
|
Kane Fyea
DUST University Ivy League
597
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 22:31:00 -
[36] - Quote
Sloth9230 wrote:ZDub 303 wrote:Your FOTM OP weapon will be nerfed into the ground Are you paying attention CCP? No one in your player base expects reasonable nerfs, you always nerf weapons into uselessness, that's just sad Well they do hit each OP weapon with thors mighty nerf hammer........ |
Marston VC
SVER True Blood Public Disorder.
440
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 22:32:00 -
[37] - Quote
Oh, and the reason why the AR is used so much more is because its like the "jack of all trades" its not as good at close range as a shotgun, and its not as good at long range as the laser rifle, but it has a good average effectiveness in all of those ranges which is why its popular. Less thought has to go into it in order to use it. Its not Number 1 because its OP, in fact I would go the opposite way and say its Number 1 BECAUSSEEEEE it is balanced. |
Scheneighnay McBob
Blueberry Gunners
1945
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 22:33:00 -
[38] - Quote
Vin Vicious wrote:Just because a gun isn't used by everyone doesn't mean it's not OP, I just debunked your whole thread that you prob took 1-2hours to make, which means I'm OP
/thread If they were so OP, they wouldn't be rare.
In other words, if you think something is OP, put SP into it and see for yourself. |
FATPrincess - XOXO
Shining Flame Amarr Empire
85
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 22:34:00 -
[39] - Quote
For any given statistic, you should always get the largest number of tries possible. I think 10 games should be a minimum. Next, skirmish matches are entirely different from ambush and domination matches. I know this because in ambush you don't see as many snipers as you see in skirmish. In skirmish, my LAV doesn't get as many kills as when I use it in ambush. Ambush OMS is what I recommend because it's longer than regular ambush, and there are installations as well.
-XOXO |
ZDub 303
TeamPlayers EoN.
623
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 22:36:00 -
[40] - Quote
Kane Fyea wrote:Sloth9230 wrote:ZDub 303 wrote:Your FOTM OP weapon will be nerfed into the ground Are you paying attention CCP? No one in your player base expects reasonable nerfs, you always nerf weapons into uselessness, that's just sad Well they do hit each OP weapon with thors mighty nerf hammer........
thors mighty nerf hammer... i got a good chuckle outta that. +1 to you. |
|
Kane Fyea
DUST University Ivy League
601
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 22:36:00 -
[41] - Quote
Scheneighnay McBob wrote:Vin Vicious wrote:Just because a gun isn't used by everyone doesn't mean it's not OP, I just debunked your whole thread that you prob took 1-2hours to make, which means I'm OP
/thread If they were so OP, they wouldn't be rare. In other words, if you think something is OP, put SP into it and see for yourself. Btw, how do you explain ARs getting so many more kills than scrambler rifles? I see SRs all the time, so a lot of people use them. Well I shred shields with the SCR then kill with the SMG so most of my kills are from the SMG. |
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
913
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 22:38:00 -
[42] - Quote
Kane Fyea wrote:Buster Friently wrote:Kane Fyea wrote:Buster Friently wrote:Marston VC wrote:1.) SMG's in my opinion are overpowered (especially the proto version) HOWEVER this weapon has missed out on the nerf hammer because it's an under used weapon. It doesn't get reallllyyy good until you have the ishukone assault SMG with proficiency 4 or 5 so most people aren't willing to make that kind of investment. But that thing is literally the breach rifle on steroids. (in that it has the same range as the breach AR) but it shoots out FAR more bullets. Especially now with the range buffs to every gun. Seriously..... that thing is sooooo good and nobody besides me and some other vets have actually specced into them.
2.) The flaylock pistol IS OP, HOWEVER it is also a niche weapon. Some people don't like it because of a three round clip, others don't like it because it can do damage back, but nobody can deny that three of those rounds at your feet will kill you. I mean..... 200 splash damage??? really?? ffs man! It does better then actual missile launchers :/ and the real problem is with minmatar assaults running around with dual proto flaylocks! that coupled with the fact that weapon swap speed was increased makes it so that the flaylock pistol is practically a better version of the mass driver. Only it costs the same as a sidearm..... (isk/fitting wise).
3.) The fact that both of these weapons are above Scrambler rifles speak wonders. Sure! They have less kills in four matches then some of the more established and prominent guns in game, but at the end of the day that doesn't change them from being OP or Not OP. I mean..... the scrambler rifle is the answer to shield tanking, yet assault rifles are used more, and that's simply because its the most familiar weapon people see when coming into this game. Therefore people prefer them, therefore they are more common, therefore other weapons are less common, therefore people can get upset if they die from weapons there not used to dying from.
What would have been far more interesting is to post up the amount of instances each player in all four matches carried their specific weapons. There could have been 5 flaylock users in each match, but if only 1 or 2 of them got any kills that's all were seeing right now.
And even if it turns out there isn't that many users to specific guns, that too does not prove its balanced. Back in closed beta Tanks = god mode. CCP made them incredibly hard to kill so as to test out how people would react. They were the most overpowered thing this game has ever had. (imagine a tank that could tank 13 standard forge gun shots before its shields were gone). HOWEVER not everyone used them! In fact, its pretty easy to say only a majority of people specced into tanks at that time. I mean if there was 4 tanks per match that build, there was still 12 other people who didn't use them. The fact of the matter issssss
Preference > Weapon effectiveness
People will play more with what they enjoy rather then what is better at killing. This does not mean OP weapons like the Flaylock pistol don't exist, it just means that most people prefer not to use a gun as gimmicky as that. Having a niche, by definition, means the weapon is capable of killing in it's preferred role, but not outside of it. This is made plainly clear by the numbers. The Flaylock has a niche, but is not OP. The SMG, is also, less OP than the generalist weapon of the AR even considering that the AR is a "comfort weapon" for most players. Having said that, the AR represents more than twice the number of kills ans the next highest light weapon. That, my friend, is the definition of OP. The fact that more people carry it is just more evidence. No it's because the AR is the go to weapon in any shooter. If the weapon was underpowered though, they would migrate out of it to something else. Clearly this isn't happening. Thus, people stay with it because it's very effective. Too effective. OP in fact. It's because it's a general use weapon. It is the most flexible. It is also the first weapon noobs go to usually. When something kills fine and you already have it then why go to a different weapon? Just because many people use a weapon does not mean it's OP. This is coming from a SCR user BTW. (Also I didn't say it was UP)
Actually it does mean it's OP. Look at it this way, if everyone wants to use that weapon, to the exclusion of the other weapons that diversify the game, it means the weapon is too desirable, and is damaging diversity. this, in turn, means either that the weapon in question needs to be made less desirable, or the alternative weapons need to be made more desirable.
Which should we do with regards to the AR? |
Jathniel
G I A N T EoN.
598
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 22:38:00 -
[43] - Quote
You can't possible consider this scientific, accurate, or even logical to follow. If anything, this is everything that is wrong with popular science today.
Numbers from one match is inconclusive data. Numbers from one match, without some kind of way for us to verify whether your numbers are honest is VERY inconclusive data. Even if you provided totals and/or averages, from YOUR matches, that data is not conclusive enough to determine whether something is OP or not. Or if a particular weapon is "dominating the game" as a whole.
Your logic is totally biased, and flawed. You take a fragment of (allegedly) unbiased data, and assume it somehow proves your own interpretation. Talk about confirmation bias! Because someone likes apples, does that mean that hate oranges? Gimme a break...
This is all your "data" says: "THESE are the kills done with THESE weapons, in THIS match, according to the viewpoint of THIS player." Period. From that data, you can draw conclusions about weapons and stats for THAT match.
If you want to raise questions about weapon balances and domination, as a serious player study, you need to get other players in on it. Arrange something much bigger. At least with a dozen or two people, and try for them to get the average of at least 100 matches.
12-24 people doing 100 matches each = 1200-2400 matches. Dust averages what? About 3000-5000 people every day? 2400 matches times 32 players each match will have about 76000 players run through it. That means that every Dust player online at that point will participate in a match where someone from your study is involved, at LEAST once.
Tally up your data, then present it, and don't make broad, sweeping assumptions based on your data. Just say, "This is the data that we gather across X many matches, using X many people, under X circumstances." or say, "The data says, weapon X has these many kills." Data like THAT can be presented to the community and CCP, and they can run the needed formulae to make adjustments IF they say fit, and if the playerbase desires it.
If you're as scienfically-minded as you front yourself to be, why can't you resist the urge to interpret data too deeply? |
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
913
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 22:40:00 -
[44] - Quote
Jathniel wrote:You can't possible consider this scientific, accurate, or even logical to follow. If anything, this is everything that is wrong with popular science today.
Numbers from one match is inconclusive data. Numbers from one match, without some kind of way for us to verify whether your numbers are honest is VERY inconclusive data. Even if you provided totals and/or averages, from YOUR matches, that data is not conclusive enough to determine whether something is OP or not. Or if a particular weapon is "dominating the game" as a whole.
Your logic is totally biased, and flawed. You take a fragment of (allegedly) unbiased data, and assume it somehow proves your own interpretation. Talk about confirmation bias! Because someone likes apples, does that mean that hate oranges? Gimme a break...
This is all your "data" says: "THESE are the kills done with THESE weapons, in THIS match, according to the viewpoint of THIS player." Period. From that data, you can draw conclusions about weapons and stats for THAT match.
If you want to raise questions about weapon balances and domination, as a serious player study, you need to get other players in on it. Arrange something much bigger. At least with a dozen or two people, and try for them to get the average of at least 100 matches.
12-24 people doing 100 matches each = 1200-2400 matches. Dust averages what? About 3000-5000 people every day? 2400 matches times 32 players each match will have about 76000 players run through it. That means that every Dust player online at that point will participate in a match where someone from your study is involved, at LEAST once.
Tally up your data, then present it, and don't make broad, sweeping assumptions based on your data. Just say, "This is the data that we gather across X many matches, using X many people, under X circumstances." or say, "The data says, weapon X has these many kills." Data like THAT can be presented to the community and CCP, and they can run the needed formulae to make adjustments IF they say fit, and if the playerbase desires it.
If you're as scienfically-minded as you front yourself to be, why can't you resist the urge to interpret data too deeply?
True, this isn't very scientific. It is only more scientific than any argument put on these forums regarding OP weapons and niches than before. You're right though, it isn't very scientific.
Only CCP can truly bring scientific numbers to the argument. Again though, what I've done is more scientific that what has come before. |
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
913
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 22:42:00 -
[45] - Quote
FATPrincess - XOXO wrote:For any given statistic, you should always get the largest number of tries possible. I think 10 games should be a minimum. Next, skirmish matches are entirely different from ambush and domination matches. I know this because in ambush you don't see as many snipers as you see in skirmish. In skirmish, my LAV doesn't get as many kills as when I use it in ambush. Ambush OMS is what I recommend because it's longer than regular ambush, and there are installations as well.
-XOXO
Please feel free to do this. My GF was only willing to record data for four matches. You'll note that I commented in the OP that this isn't as much data as I'd prefer.
|
FATPrincess - XOXO
Shining Flame Amarr Empire
85
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 22:42:00 -
[46] - Quote
Nevermind.
-XOXO |
Jathniel
G I A N T EoN.
598
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 22:43:00 -
[47] - Quote
Buster Friently wrote:Jathniel wrote:You can't possible consider this scientific, accurate, or even logical to follow. If anything, this is everything that is wrong with popular science today.
Numbers from one match is inconclusive data. Numbers from one match, without some kind of way for us to verify whether your numbers are honest is VERY inconclusive data. Even if you provided totals and/or averages, from YOUR matches, that data is not conclusive enough to determine whether something is OP or not. Or if a particular weapon is "dominating the game" as a whole.
Your logic is totally biased, and flawed. You take a fragment of (allegedly) unbiased data, and assume it somehow proves your own interpretation. Talk about confirmation bias! Because someone likes apples, does that mean that hate oranges? Gimme a break...
This is all your "data" says: "THESE are the kills done with THESE weapons, in THIS match, according to the viewpoint of THIS player." Period. From that data, you can draw conclusions about weapons and stats for THAT match.
If you want to raise questions about weapon balances and domination, as a serious player study, you need to get other players in on it. Arrange something much bigger. At least with a dozen or two people, and try for them to get the average of at least 100 matches.
12-24 people doing 100 matches each = 1200-2400 matches. Dust averages what? About 3000-5000 people every day? 2400 matches times 32 players each match will have about 76000 players run through it. That means that every Dust player online at that point will participate in a match where someone from your study is involved, at LEAST once.
Tally up your data, then present it, and don't make broad, sweeping assumptions based on your data. Just say, "This is the data that we gather across X many matches, using X many people, under X circumstances." or say, "The data says, weapon X has these many kills." Data like THAT can be presented to the community and CCP, and they can run the needed formulae to make adjustments IF they say fit, and if the playerbase desires it.
If you're as scienfically-minded as you front yourself to be, why can't you resist the urge to interpret data too deeply? True, this isn't very scientific. It is only more scientific than any argument put on these forums regarding OP weapons and niches than before. You're right though, it isn't very scientific. Only CCP can truly bring scientific numbers to the argument. Again though, what I've done is more scientific that what has come before.
I understand. I'm not trying to be overly critical. But you can't argue against emotion using logic.
You gotta get on the same page as people emotionally, before they even START trying to listen to reason.
It's like, "idgaf what you're reasoning is. i hate your guts!" You know? lol |
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
913
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 22:43:00 -
[48] - Quote
FATPrincess - XOXO wrote:Nevermind.
-XOXO
Did you even read my response? Have at it. |
FATPrincess - XOXO
Shining Flame Amarr Empire
85
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 22:44:00 -
[49] - Quote
Buster Friently wrote:FATPrincess - XOXO wrote:For any given statistic, you should always get the largest number of tries possible. I think 10 games should be a minimum. Next, skirmish matches are entirely different from ambush and domination matches. I know this because in ambush you don't see as many snipers as you see in skirmish. In skirmish, my LAV doesn't get as many kills as when I use it in ambush. Ambush OMS is what I recommend because it's longer than regular ambush, and there are installations as well.
-XOXO Please feel free to do this. My GF was only willing to record data for four matches. You'll note that I commented in the OP that this isn't as much data as I'd prefer.
I can try if I'm bored enough.
-XOXO
|
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
913
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 22:45:00 -
[50] - Quote
Jathniel wrote:Buster Friently wrote:Jathniel wrote:You can't possible consider this scientific, accurate, or even logical to follow. If anything, this is everything that is wrong with popular science today.
Numbers from one match is inconclusive data. Numbers from one match, without some kind of way for us to verify whether your numbers are honest is VERY inconclusive data. Even if you provided totals and/or averages, from YOUR matches, that data is not conclusive enough to determine whether something is OP or not. Or if a particular weapon is "dominating the game" as a whole.
Your logic is totally biased, and flawed. You take a fragment of (allegedly) unbiased data, and assume it somehow proves your own interpretation. Talk about confirmation bias! Because someone likes apples, does that mean that hate oranges? Gimme a break...
This is all your "data" says: "THESE are the kills done with THESE weapons, in THIS match, according to the viewpoint of THIS player." Period. From that data, you can draw conclusions about weapons and stats for THAT match.
If you want to raise questions about weapon balances and domination, as a serious player study, you need to get other players in on it. Arrange something much bigger. At least with a dozen or two people, and try for them to get the average of at least 100 matches.
12-24 people doing 100 matches each = 1200-2400 matches. Dust averages what? About 3000-5000 people every day? 2400 matches times 32 players each match will have about 76000 players run through it. That means that every Dust player online at that point will participate in a match where someone from your study is involved, at LEAST once.
Tally up your data, then present it, and don't make broad, sweeping assumptions based on your data. Just say, "This is the data that we gather across X many matches, using X many people, under X circumstances." or say, "The data says, weapon X has these many kills." Data like THAT can be presented to the community and CCP, and they can run the needed formulae to make adjustments IF they say fit, and if the playerbase desires it.
If you're as scienfically-minded as you front yourself to be, why can't you resist the urge to interpret data too deeply? True, this isn't very scientific. It is only more scientific than any argument put on these forums regarding OP weapons and niches than before. You're right though, it isn't very scientific. Only CCP can truly bring scientific numbers to the argument. Again though, what I've done is more scientific that what has come before. I understand. I'm not trying to be overly critical. But you can't argue against emotion using logic. You gotta get on the same page as people emotionally, before they even START trying to listen to reason. It's like, "idgaf what you're reasoning is. i hate your guts!" You know? lol
Well, the problem with emotional arguing is that most of the players here use ARs, therefore anything not AR is automatically evil. I don't want to play AR 514 any more than I already have. We need some rationality IMHO, because the emotional war leads us to AR 514. |
|
Marston VC
SVER True Blood Public Disorder.
440
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 23:00:00 -
[51] - Quote
Quote:Actually it does mean it's OP. Look at it this way, if everyone wants to use that weapon, to the exclusion of the other weapons that diversify the game, it means the weapon is too desirable, and is damaging diversity. this, in turn, means either that the weapon in question needs to be made less desirable, or the alternative weapons need to be made more desirable.
Which should we do with regards to the AR?
Actually it does not mean its OP, nothing should be done in regards to the AR as its been nerfed enough to where its balanced now. Your thinking about as open minded as a fruit fly right now, and im not going to argue the point any further. What ive said already is more then reason enough to undermine your claim, and I think a majority of the people who play this game, along with devs too, agree with me on this topic.
Guns are not OP because of player preference. They are OP because of how over effective they are for the people that do use them. By your definition the game is balanced when every gun is used equally, but I will tell you right now, there will never be as many scrambler pistol users as SMG users, and there will never be as many Laser rifle users as there are Assault rifle users, and the reason for that is because the first of each comparison is too far out of the common populace's comfort zone. |
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
914
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 23:02:00 -
[52] - Quote
Marston VC wrote:Quote:Actually it does mean it's OP. Look at it this way, if everyone wants to use that weapon, to the exclusion of the other weapons that diversify the game, it means the weapon is too desirable, and is damaging diversity. this, in turn, means either that the weapon in question needs to be made less desirable, or the alternative weapons need to be made more desirable.
Which should we do with regards to the AR? Actually it does not mean its OP, nothing should be done in regards to the AR as its been nerfed enough to where its balanced now. Your thinking about as open minded as a fruit fly right now, and im not going to argue the point any further. What ive said already is more then reason enough to undermine your claim, and I think a majority of the people who play this game, along with devs too, agree with me on this topic. Guns are not OP because of player preference. They are OP because of how over effective they are for the people that do use them.
Actually, no, it doesn't undermine my claim.
An OP weapon damages diversity. The Flaylock isn't, the AR is.
No, if a weapon is effective for people that use it, that is an indication of viability, not OP. For viability to become OP, the weapon must be good outside of it's niche. The weapon must be good everywhere, like the AR, and unlike the Flaylock. |
ZDub 303
TeamPlayers EoN.
624
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 23:21:00 -
[53] - Quote
Buster Friently wrote:Actually, no, it doesn't undermine my claim.
An OP weapon damages diversity. The Flaylock isn't, the AR is.
No, if a weapon is effective for people that use it, that is an indication of viability, not OP. For viability to become OP, the weapon must be good outside of it's niche. The weapon must be good everywhere, like the AR, and unlike the Flaylock.
You can't make that statement in a game where there is no ability to respec.
Why does everyone pick ARs? Because its the only gun that works in most situations, and its the most familiar to people coming from other games.
This game is extremely punishing for not putting points into ARs... you need around 2 million SP into ARs before you can even consider yourself competitive... thats months and months of SP for some people.
You can't expect most people to do anything else... it does not mean the weapon is OP or that ARs are killing diversity, it means this overly punishing SP system is kill diversity.
None of these metrics mean anything in a system where you are not allowed to change what weapons you can use, and in any sort of competitive play, you need Proficiency 3 minimum before you are even relevant.
Now... enter into PC... where its much more competitive and people will use whatever OP FOTM they can if it means the win... You wanna know what that most common combination of weapons is in PC?
Flaylock pistols and fused locus grenades. Both of which are being used because they are overpowered.
|
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
915
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 23:25:00 -
[54] - Quote
ZDub 303 wrote:Buster Friently wrote:Actually, no, it doesn't undermine my claim.
An OP weapon damages diversity. The Flaylock isn't, the AR is.
No, if a weapon is effective for people that use it, that is an indication of viability, not OP. For viability to become OP, the weapon must be good outside of it's niche. The weapon must be good everywhere, like the AR, and unlike the Flaylock. You can't make that statement in a game where there is no ability to respec. Why does everyone pick ARs? Because its the only gun that works in most situations, and its the most familiar to people coming from other games. This game is extremely punishing for not putting points into ARs... you need around 2 million SP into ARs before you can even consider yourself competitive... thats months and months of SP for some people. You can't expect most people to do anything else... it does not mean the weapon is OP or that ARs are killing diversity, it means this overly punishing SP system is kill diversity. None of these metrics mean anything in a system where you are not allowed to change what weapons you can use, and in any sort of competitive play, you need Proficiency 3 minimum before you are even relevant. Now... enter into PC... where its much more competitive and people will use whatever OP FOTM they can if it means the win... You wanna know what that most common combination of weapons is in PC? Flaylock pistols and fused locus grenades. Both of which are being used because they are overpowered.
I've heard this about PC. I've also stated that if someone actually put some numbers up, that I'd agree that the Flaylock is a problem for PC. I don't play PC. Most players don't.
People can respec, and have been given two so far. Also, with events like the 3x weekend we are currently having, people have the opportunity to get into other weapons. See, the thing is, they don't.
We are, what, 4 months since open beta, and AR kills represent two thirds of all weapons kills from light and sidearm. That isn't preference, that a problem for diversity, that's OP.
|
DUST Fiend
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
4516
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 23:29:00 -
[55] - Quote
Buster Friently wrote:I've implored people to check out the killfeed so they can see, themselves, which weapons are dominating the game. I'm shocked that the generalist weapon is being used the most in a game that forces you to spend months to change your playstyle.
Nerf ARs. Do whatever you want with the AR. Skilled players are still going to destroy with it, and they're going to destroy those using it. Most weapons are fairly OP in their own way, AR just shows more because people like to play it safe when they aren't allowed to change their mind.
Assault Rifles are the go to weapon in many if not all shooters.
Sorry bro.
Adapt.
Or cry. |
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
916
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 23:30:00 -
[56] - Quote
DUST Fiend wrote:Buster Friently wrote:I've implored people to check out the killfeed so they can see, themselves, which weapons are dominating the game. I'm shocked that the generalist weapon is being used the most in a game that forces you to spend months to change your playstyle. Nerf ARs. Do whatever you want with the AR. Skilled players are still going to destroy with it, and they're going to destroy those using it. Most weapons are fairly OP in their own way, AR just shows more because people like to play it safe when they aren't allowed to change their mind. Assault Rifles are the go to weapon in many if not all shooters. Sorry bro. Adapt. Or cry.
Agreed. That's what I'm saying. Adapt or die. Especially to the AR crown who think that any kill not from an AR is evidence of OP. |
CharCharOdell
Shining Flame Amarr Empire
273
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 23:31:00 -
[57] - Quote
Buster Friently wrote:So, I've seen, and commented on, the typical "it's not AR so nerf it posts" and have tried to explain that just because something kills you, but isn't an AR, that doesn't mean it's OP. I've implored people to check out the killfeed so they can see, themselves, which weapons are dominating the game. Knowing that most players won't bother, but will continue to champion their own little cause, I've done it for you. I have compiled the killfeed from four skirmish games today in which I dropped alone. I removed my own kills from the tally. If you'd like, I can let you know what those are. Here are the results: Totals for all four matches combined: Assault Rifle 100 Turrets 65 Sniper Rifle 44 HMG 37 Impact 35 SMG 34 Grenades 27 Misc 26 Mass Driver 20 Flaylock 16 Scrambler Rifle 13 Strike 12 Shotgun 10 Swarm Launcher 8 Forge Gun 5 Laser Rifle 5 Melee 1 RE 1 Unknown 1 Scrambler Pistol Plasma Cannon Nova Knives Now, what can be learned from this. First off, it is clear that all the forum whining regarding Flaylock pistols is just that - whining. It is just number 10 on the killfeed, behind grenades, and significantly - far behind the SMG, another sidearm. We can also see that players should probably consider carrying more AV, considering impact kills are number 5, and turrets (comprising installations and all vehicle turrets together) are number 2. Most significantly, the most OP weapon on the battlefield, representing nearly 22% of all kills in Dust, is the AR. The next highest handheld weapon, the sniper rifle comes in at just 9% of overall kills. The much maligned Flaylock clocks in at less than 3.5% of all kills. If anyone is interested in the raw data per fight, it is here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Avo42h0_YoMNdEtzNWk4UWRENTRnWVpkQjZJQXhJUGc&usp=sharingNow, before anyone jumps on and says why haven't I broken down this data into individual weapons, run more games, etc. I'm sorry. I'd like too, but I don't have video recording equipment, so I had my GF help by tallying all the kills in realtime, so sorry, this is as detailed as I can get.
When this game is balanced, every one of those will be the same number of kills.
|
ZDub 303
TeamPlayers EoN.
624
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 23:45:00 -
[58] - Quote
CharCharOdell wrote:When this game is balanced, every one of those will be the same number of kills.
No they definitely never will... and many weapons are niche weapons designed only for certain situations.
Once we have all 4 racial variants of ARs, and they are internally balanced between each other, they should represent the majority of the kills in a game, as they are the generalist weapons. |
First Prophet
Jaguar Empire
248
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 23:45:00 -
[59] - Quote
Unless you go and get an actually decent sample size, this data is completely useless. |
Bob Teller
Royal Uhlans Amarr Empire
21
|
Posted - 2013.07.07 23:49:00 -
[60] - Quote
Wepons that are used more are not op,they are just used more...That is some twisted way to try to (prove) that the flaylock is not OP.This sure show how people get attached to their precious op guns and are willing to do anything to keep it as it is;) |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |