267 replies to this topic

[Villz]

Glad to see paul actually reads these threads unfortunatly 90% of them are written by people with double digit IQ's and ego problems whom use colliqual evidence as a basis for balance....

[Deathlike]

Here's something to think about...

Many FPS games have always introduced a "cone of fire" effect for guns that are meant to be short range.. favoring skilled consistency to get headshots or whatever. On the flip side, long range weapons like sniper rifles tend to require leading time and other factors to get their shot to be "relatively accurate", even if the shot doesn't hit the head/target directly, but would usually hurt the part of the body significantly when it does connect.

I would not advocate the "cone of fire" by any means (although, the MGs seem to suffer that fate). However, something like a PPC or Gauss Rifle shouldn't be pinpoint accurate, but should have natural sort of inaccuracies. It should be less accurate within the torso and more accurate for the arms (as I think that's the case now anyways). I'm thinking that a weapon that is less accurate over longer range would be more helpful in mitigating this issue altogether. Brawling would be less affected by this change, and that's the only way that would make this fair...

It's probably the only way to make the current version of the ER Large a better sniping weapon than the ER PPC. At least when you overheat with lasers, the lasers immediately shut off. PPCs are over and done with after firing.

Edited by Deathlike, 18 May 2013 - 03:46 AM.

[Triple Patte]

With that level of respect and that attitude, it's surprising devs took time to answer this post.

Paul was nice enough to give an idea of what is to come, a glimpse at an idea in devellopment. No need to bury it in insults before the official post.

If you guys (not aiming this at all the community) want the devs to continue communicating with us, please try to communicate like adults.

[MustrumRidcully]

I am more and more hesistant to change anything about convergence, and more in favor of changing something about how many weapons you can fire at once. If youc an fire 6 PPCs with a 0.25 second delay and every PPC hits that Hunchback's hunch, even as he slowly reacts to your fire and starts twisting, you were a good shot, you should reap your rewards. (And if the enemy didn't twist and didn't react, he was bad enough that it's a deserved loss).

Turning all weapons into beams is not likely to happen, removing alpha strike and group fire also seems unlikely. So the closest I can come up with for this is still lowering the heat capacity. Either to something like half, or by removing the heat capacity bonus from heat sinks, or something in between. Increase the heat dissipation across the board, and you get more people chain-firing, and less punishment for people that make builds that have to chain-fire or have their weapons with different ranges, projectile speeds and projectile behaviours spread or miss.

Mind you, that's only a start. Reducing the heat capacity and increasing the dissipation doesn't mean the current weapon stats become better balanced. It only limits how easy it is to alpha-strike consequence-free. But that's already a big gain, as it will effectively lower accuracy and thus precision.

[Asmudius Heng]

Ridiculous, on 18 May 2013 - 04:03 AM, said:

If you guys (not aiming this at all the community) want the devs to continue communicating with us, please try to communicate like adults.

Many of us do.

What baffles those that are trying to be constructive is that the devs choose to communicate with the agressive posts rather than the constructive ones.

The community is craving the WHY of many decisions and this is not being given so it leads to frustration - and then when the devs reply like this those that have been keeping thier tempter, posting well thought out ideas, and trying to make suggestions that they at least hope will be read ... well it is disheartening that this is where they choose to communicate.

[Kiiyor]

Ridiculous, on 18 May 2013 - 04:03 AM, said:

With that level of respect and that attitude, it's surprising devs took time to answer this post.

Paul was nice enough to give an idea of what is to come, a glimpse at an idea in devellopment. No need to bury it in insults before the official post.

If you guys (not aiming this at all the community) want the devs to continue communicating with us, please try to communicate like adults.

I don't think grown up communication was ever the intent. The whole point of trolling is warp a comment and to fabricate meaning so a nice, fat argument can be created.

The OP knows this quite well I think. 8/10, even got one of the devs to bite.

[Livewyr]

So the key is to treat the forums like twitter... Most interesting!

[MustrumRidcully]

One thing to note, however: I think the idea of extra heat penalties for firing mulltiple identical weapons at once is bad. But people - even professional game developers- are allowed to have bad ideas, and we shouldn't be too harsh on them for having bad ideas. It's part of the creative process to come up with a bunch of ideas and throw out what works and what doesn't. Of course, if the idea is poor, gets implemented and doesn't work... rage away.

[Accursed Richards]

Ridiculous, on 18 May 2013 - 04:03 AM, said:

With that level of respect and that attitude, it's surprising devs took time to answer this post.

Paul was nice enough to give an idea of what is to come, a glimpse at an idea in devellopment. No need to bury it in insults before the official post.

If you guys (not aiming this at all the community) want the devs to continue communicating with us, please try to communicate like adults.

The best way for the devs to help with that would be to simply ignore the shrill whining, and reply to to the people who put time and effort into making a reasonable argument. It would encourage good posting behaviour, and keep the heat level down on the forums, because people are getting accurate information that isn't from second-hand sites and interviews.

But they don't do that.

[Deathlike]

Livewyr, on 18 May 2013 - 04:19 AM, said:

So the key is to treat the forums like twitter... Most interesting!

@Paul
I bet you can't get an MG kill with a Spider-5K!

/intently watches waves of Spider-5Ks tickling my mech

[Deathlike]

MustrumRidcully, on 18 May 2013 - 04:19 AM, said:

Of course, if the idea is poor, gets implemented and doesn't work... rage away.

Been there, done that. Rinse and repeat.

[HybridTheory]

So much rage over something they are INTERNALLY testing. Why not take a long deep breath... relax... let them give it a try.... MAYBE have us who are playing the game give it a go and see what happens. Last time I checked this game was a BETA... we are here to help. So pointing out why you think it won't work is valid... but voicing your opinion as absolute and that it is correct for the entire community is a bit selfish. Consider many gaming companies don't offer such a large scale test to their game before it is complete. Sure it's free to play and the need for large scale open testing to generate funds is probably a needed... however if they simply say nothing at all... then change everything around... how would you feel then? I personally agree that this solution MIGHT not be the right one. However I am willing to keep an open mind and try it for myself. In the long run pop-tarting will be an issue regardless of how you change the way heat works but let's help the DEVs try something new if they think it might help... if it doesn't work... we let them know... and try something else.
Remember when people complained about the Gauss K2 all the time? No one even whispers about that anymore.......

[Karl Split]

I really cant see how he is digging his heels in, hes just working through ideas and testing them and telling us so we can suggest things.

Some days I really feel for the devs,I really do.

[Tennex]

very easy solution to all of this.

is to have different boating penalties for different weapons.

the PPC will have a higher boating penalty. and the ML will have a lower boating penalty that way the 6ML jenner/hunchback etc etc will be vialbe.

weapons like ballistics will need higher than normal boating penalties. becaue they generate so little heat, if normal penalties were used would not be efffective at deterring boating of ballistic ewapons


edit: lol never mind you already thoughht of it.

Paul Inouye, on 18 May 2013 - 12:50 AM, said:

So you want heat modifications to help fix PPC's? This is what a heat scale is. It's also unique to weapons. Some weapons will hardly see a problem... some others will see larger penalties.

the DPS nerf was good.

PPCs needed to be at 2.5dps on par with the large pulse laser. and why shouldn't it be, the costs are the same for both.

plus PPCs had a higher range, and upfront damage. it should never have been at 1.3 more dps than the LPL

Edited by Tennex, 18 May 2013 - 06:45 AM.

[Tennex]

Though a minimal penalty would be enough to deter many weapons from being boated.

and weapons like the ML would have to have an almost negligible boating penalty. so that the current builds continue to be viable

[Franchi]

Jackson Jax Teller, on 18 May 2013 - 03:31 AM, said:

Yes, wait till its in the game. Like we did with ECM. They nerfed that right fast didnt they

Is it me or do the devs here always seem to get heated and dig in when something they say isnt liked? The best/.worst example being 3rd person and the famous third reply of not wanting to know IF you wantef it or not but HOW.

It is so frustrating to know how screwed up PGI's next idea is before it even enters the game, to tell them how screwed up it is, then to have to play with it for months.

[Zyllos]

Paul Inouye, on 18 May 2013 - 12:40 AM, said:

@jeffsw6: If you're going to quote me, please at least complete the quote.

"Investigation items are not locked in and are exactly that... thoughts and tests. Do NOT go flying off the handle about how this won't work or that won't work until we make an official post."

Paul, thank you for the post.

But, the reason why people react this way is because we have no other additional information to go on.

Yes, you say that this is just an idea being thrown around. But this is the only information regarding how you guys want to balance multiple weapons being fired.

And because this is the only information we have, the community must assume this is the only idea your working on, thus the one your working to implement.

Maybe post multiple ideas you guys are working on to fix the problem?

[MCXL]

MustrumRidcully, on 18 May 2013 - 04:19 AM, said:

One thing to note, however: I think the idea of extra heat penalties for firing mulltiple identical weapons at once is bad. But people - even professional game developers- are allowed to have bad ideas, and we shouldn't be too harsh on them for having bad ideas. It's part of the creative process to come up with a bunch of ideas and throw out what works and what doesn't. Of course, if the idea is poor, gets implemented and doesn't work... rage away.

Pretty much this, iteration is key in good game design. The only thing that worries me about the proposed, extra heat penalty is that back in closed beta Paul was toying with this idea, when everyone was complaining about lasers being too strong. He knew he didn't want to hit the swayback any harder than he needed to to get the awesome back in line (7MPL was OP!!!!) and obviously the idea was scrapped.

I know that Munstrum has advocated for a lower heat cap, or penalties for going over certain heat thresholds, and I agree with those, but in order for that to happen dissipation would have to be addressed for any build utilizing high heat per damage weapons as well.

And hey, look at that! There is a link in my signature that has roughly 30 pages dedicated to just that sort of topic

[Sybreed]

just my 2 cents (only read the 1st page so far)

Instead of antagonizing Paul and telling him his idea is bad (honestly, I think he posted that just to reassure us he's looking at PPCs), we should help him find better alternatives to balance the game. The OP and all his claims about Paul's ideas being foolish and etc aren't really helping to find better solutions.

[8RoundsRapid]

Sybreed, on 18 May 2013 - 07:21 AM, said:

just my 2 cents (only read the 1st page so far)

Instead of antagonizing Paul and telling him his idea is bad (honestly, I think he posted that just to reassure us he's looking at PPCs), we should help him find better alternatives to balance the game. The OP and all his claims about Paul's ideas being foolish and etc aren't really helping to find better solutions.

Well, it is a bad idea. Horrible, in fact. Further, people have been trying to help them find better alternatives for many, many months now. They listen to none of it, and just keep making this game worse and worse. And that's mind boggling to me, cuz it's been bad for a long, long time now, and yet they still manage to make it worse.