|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Mike Poole
Kirkinen Risk Control
Caldari State
355
   |
Posted - 2013.07.22 08:22:00 -
[1] - Quote
What exactly is wrong with flavors of the month?
Isn't the basic premise that every month everyone is finding some new build that changes how the game is played? Isn't that the kind of thing you want for a game?
Lets say you had two games to choose from.
Game A has a system where every choice you make is permanent. Every bit of experience you invest stays where it is forever and ever. Everyone optimizes their time spent playing by adhering strictly to spreadsheet calculated builds. The way you play this month is nearly the same as you play next month and the month after and the month after. Any changes made to the game need to be slowly worked through over months of re-specializing with everyone complaining because it's ruined their way of playing and takes forever to adapt to.
Game B has the dreaded "respec" system where your choices aren't permanent. Every bit of experience you invest can be reallocated at a whim whenever you want. Everyone experiments with their builds, trying to find new ways of combining skills, weapons and items to find new ways to play that best suit their style and match the styles of the players they play with and against. The way you play this month can be worlds different from how you play next month or the month after. One month everyone is into tank based combat so you work on an AV build, well all of the AV builds pushed the tank users to switch to infantry builds so you decide to swap your AV setup for a tank and so on and so on and so on. Any changes made to the game are fluidly and dynamically adapted to by the entire player base with few complaints because everyone can find a way to adapt.
Which of those games sounds more fun to play? The one that punishes you when it changes or the one that lets you dynamically adapt to changes? The one that gets its longevity from a long and punishing system of grind after grind after grind or the one that gets its longevity from people finding new ways to play and enjoying the experience? |
Mike Poole
Kirkinen Risk Control
Caldari State
356
|
Posted - 2013.07.22 08:35:00 -
[2] - Quote
Cosgar wrote:The problem is when the flavor of the moth is something game breaking like TAC ARs, CaLogis, Core Flaylock Pistols, LLAVS and Contact Grenades. You wind up with an army of tryhards abusing game mechanics, eliminating healthy counter play, and ruining everyone else's fun.
And that is bad because we don't want CCP to learn about game breaking mechanics?
Is there any better way for a game breaking build to get noticed than when the majority of players spec into it and start utterly destroying each other in every single game?
If you're limiting how many people can take advantage of something that utterly game breaking you're limiting how often people encounter that build. Those that complain are in the minority and are told to "try harder" or "adapt or die" until enough people start abusing the build that the greater community takes notice and CCP is forced to act. |
Mike Poole
Kirkinen Risk Control
Caldari State
356
|
Posted - 2013.07.22 08:50:00 -
[3] - Quote
ChromeBreaker wrote:THe problem is they last a month... thats the point....
people skill into the OP weapon, it gets nerfed, and they cry their newly balanced weapon isnt good enough. AND that now it isnt OP they'd rathe be using something else... cAn ayE haVe a ResPec PLs
The problem is your reading comprehension...
If people can respec at any time and their FOTM gets nerfed or if other players learn how to counter it or new items get released or whatever happens instead of having a forum filled with people whining about wanting a respec and people whining about people wanting respecs people simply respec and continue playing. |
|
|
| |
|