143 réponses à ce sujet

[capn233]

They need to buff all the weapons until even the most casual of players can solo gold with any class or loadout.

[Indenter]

Reeger Carbide is no where near overpowered.

Some people are just alliance drama queens.

Having to keep your crosshair on a target for a whole second to do 1k damage - sure, good luck.

[WARMACHINE9]

[/quote]

That's exactly what you're asking for.

The reegar fills a role and function that hasn't existed until now. There's no weapon like it, and it fulfills that function perfectly. Under your aegis vanguard will get tac cloack too so they can do all the things an inf can do, and adepts will also get tech and blade armor combined cause everyone should have pointy glowy things so no one feels left out.

Homogenization ftw.

[/quote]
Bless you gentle being Bless you.

[kira28]

I 100% agree because before the krysae sniper rifle came out i had to actually aim with my infiltrators! I can see the future now all the lobbies will be full of infiltrators with krysae sniper rifles- why waste your time with the other classes/weapons when you wont be able to contribute. Headshots are for tryhards anyways.

[WARMACHINE9]

kira28 wrote...

I 100% agree because before the krysae sniper rifle came out i had to actually aim with my infiltrators! I can see the future now all the lobbies will be full of infiltrators with krysae sniper rifles- why waste your time with the other classes/weapons when you wont be able to contribute. Headshots are for tryhards anyways.

I hope your being sarcastic cause the only infiltrator I use is the quarian and it would get REALLY boring using the same character and gun every match. Engineer for the win(pick one they're all great!!)

[Cyonan]

Xaijin wrote...

That's exactly what you're asking for.

The reegar fills a role and function that hasn't existed until now. There's no weapon like it, and it fulfills that function perfectly. Under your aegis vanguard will get tac cloack too so they can do all the things an inf can do, and adepts will also get tech and blade armor combined cause everyone should have pointy glowy things so no one feels left out.

Homogenization ftw.

People need to stop thinking that balance = homogenization. Balance does not mean that every single gun and class needs every single tool available and to have the exact same damage, RoF, weight, capacity, and accuracy.

Things can be unique and different, and still be balanced. This has been proven in other games many many times.

It would not necessarily be easy, but that was never my point anyway.

[Dynamik78]

As I said in the nerf post when I use Crysae I could easyly outscore myself with my BWV or Valiant: it fires really slow and causes the cloak bug...Atm I am just using it cos it melts things in puddles on the floor xD

[Zkyire]

InTheZone wrote...

 "This is overpowered"

"That's overpowered"

"OMG, GAME TOO EASY"

Then use the Shruiken and call it a day. Remember the Falcon? It got nerfed to hell before the rest of the community could enjoy it. Sheesh. It's like the only thing this community does successfully is **** and moan.

Yes, thank you!

/citizenkaneapplause

[Biotic_Warlock]

Nerf all the things...!

Modifié par Biotic_Warlock, 30 mai 2012 - 11:42 .

[Xaijin]

Cyonan wrote...

Xaijin wrote...

That's exactly what you're asking for.

The reegar fills a role and function that hasn't existed until now. There's no weapon like it, and it fulfills that function perfectly. Under your aegis vanguard will get tac cloack too so they can do all the things an inf can do, and adepts will also get tech and blade armor combined cause everyone should have pointy glowy things so no one feels left out.

Homogenization ftw.

People need to stop thinking that balance = homogenization. Balance does not mean that every single gun and class needs every single tool available and to have the exact same damage, RoF, weight, capacity, and accuracy.

Things can be unique and different, and still be balanced. This has been proven in other games many many times.

It would not necessarily be easy, but that was never my point anyway.

I never said balance = homogenization. What you're asking for is homogenization.

[Cyonan]

Xaijin wrote...

I never said balance = homogenization. What you're asking for is homogenization.

No, what I'm asking for is balance.

At no point have I ever asked for everything to be the same as everything else. I have asked for them to be equal in relative power, but not the exact same.

The closest I have come to saying anything about homogenization is mentioning that every class in WoW can now deal damage if they so desire. The classes are in no way the exact same though, and still can fill different roles with different abilities.

Modifié par Cyonan, 30 mai 2012 - 11:54 .

[nicethugbert]

Because people suck.

[10bears]

InTheZone wrote...

 "This is overpowered"

"That's overpowered"

"OMG, GAME TOO EASY"

Then use the Shruiken and call it a day. Remember the Falcon? It got nerfed to hell before the rest of the community could enjoy it. Sheesh. It's like the only thing this community does successfully is **** and moan.

Agree

[neteng101]

Cyonan wrote...

I'm not really telling people they have to play the game differently. I'm giving them the option to do so. In my theoretical scenario the Carnifex would still be a good weapon for a caster, but they would also be able to use something like the Eagle without feeling like they've gimped themselves. If you preferred the Carnifex I'm not telling you "No, you don't get to use that gun now".

Some guns are going to favour certain class mechanics, and that's fine. Tactical Cloak is always going to favour a slower firing weapon just by the mechanics of the ability. That doesn't mean we should just leave OP things OP and weak things weak.

That's a horrible idea.  It promotes BORING.  You need to have some OP and some weak...  then when you're up for a challenge, pick an weaker support class and a lesser weapon.  You can't do this if all the weapons are equally good or bad.  Its a HORRIBLE HORRIBLE idea to make things all along the same plane.  Downright boring is what you'll make the game into.  You sound like an outright socialist.  We must make all things equal.  Inequality is bad, etc.

Its ok to have weak weapons.  And some OP ones.  And most in the middle.  Balance is achieved in the weight, clip size, etc...  not by nerfing damage.  And if you think OP is bad then we should nerf the Cobra too.  What, it kills everything? (ok, I guess sometimes it fires blanks).

[Cyonan]

neteng101 wrote...
That's a horrible idea. It promotes BORING. You need to have some OP and some weak... then when you're up for a challenge, pick an weaker support class and a lesser weapon. You can't do this if all the weapons are equally good or bad. Its a HORRIBLE HORRIBLE idea to make things all along the same plane. Downright boring is what you'll make the game into. You sound like an outright socialist. We must make all things equal. Inequality is bad, etc.

Its ok to have weak weapons. And some OP ones. And most in the middle. Balance is achieved in the weight, clip size, etc... not by nerfing damage. And if you think OP is bad then we should nerf the Cobra too. What, it kills everything? (ok, I guess sometimes it fires blanks).

How is it boring to be able to choose your weapons according to your playstyle, and to have a greater variety of weapons to choose from while feeling useful?

Challenge should force me to push my skills and knowledge of the game to the limit. My skills and knowledge of the game should not be used to gimp myself so I actually have a challenge.

And I would love for you to point out where I have indicated that damage is the only nerfable stat in this game. I think the weight system lends itself amazingly to balancing out weapons if you use it right. Take a weapon like the Avenger. It's not the most damaging thing around, but it's very accurate, has fairly solid ammo capacity and most importantly for caster types it's very lightweight. All of that is rendered 100% pointless however because the Carnifex weighs the exact same and gives a lot more damage.

You'll also have to explain to me exactly how calling me a socialist is supposed to make me feel bad(I'm assuming it's supposed to do that?), cause I'm not getting it.

[neteng101]

Cyonan wrote...

How is it boring to be able to choose your weapons according to your playstyle, and to have a greater variety of weapons to choose from while feeling useful?

Challenge should force me to push my skills and knowledge of the game to the limit. My skills and knowledge of the game should not be used to gimp myself so I actually have a challenge.

See there's part of the challenge right there.  Picking the right loadouts is part of the game.  So how does OP weapons affect your choices anyway?  You can use it, or choose not to.  I can see why a weak weapon might limit your choices more, but it is your choice to use that weapon.  Not every weapon should be equally viable.  Besides the Carnifex in your example, nothing stopping anyone from packing a Phalanx.  Its a perfectly viable weapon, faster rate of fire, while keeping your cooldowns low.  Or you could pack the Avenger as you noted.

I don't get how nerfing anything makes your choices any better?  You don't have to pack the best weapon out there, if that's not your playstyle.  That's your choice.

As far as I can see, there's some weaker and better weapons, but is anything truly OP?  It takes combos of things to make OP in the game, and that is part of the knowledge that is to be gained/learned.  You don't want everything to be the same or it will be just outright boring.

Sameness is boring.  Some weapons should be great.  Some should suck.  That is the correct order of things, and that keeps everything interesting...  including the rather frustrating unlocking game.  Get a great weapon you jump, get crap you cry, but its part of the charm if you ask me.

[Cyonan]

neteng101 wrote...
See there's part of the challenge right there. Picking the right loadouts is part of the game. So how does OP weapons affect your choices anyway? You can use it, or choose not to. I can see why a weak weapon might limit your choices more, but it is your choice to use that weapon. Not every weapon should be equally viable. Besides the Carnifex in your example, nothing stopping anyone from packing a Phalanx. Its a perfectly viable weapon, faster rate of fire, while keeping your cooldowns low. Or you could pack the Avenger as you noted.

I don't get how nerfing anything makes your choices any better? You don't have to pack the best weapon out there, if that's not your playstyle. That's your choice.

As far as I can see, there's some weaker and better weapons, but is anything truly OP? It takes combos of things to make OP in the game, and that is part of the knowledge that is to be gained/learned. You don't want everything to be the same or it will be just outright boring.

Sameness is boring. Some weapons should be great. Some should suck. That is the correct order of things, and that keeps everything interesting... including the rather frustrating unlocking game. Get a great weapon you jump, get crap you cry, but its part of the charm if you ask me.

Balancing(Which apparently a lot of people forget includes buffing as well =P) would let you choose the weapon that fits your playstyle and still get a challenge out of it.

Using myself as an example I'm a fan of sniper rifles, specifically the high powered but slower firing ones. This already limits me to about 5 rifles(Mantis, Viper, Widow, Black Widow, Javelin) but whatever, I don't expect all the guns to be tailored to me specifically and 5 for my specific playstyle is rather good variety. If I want to get a challenge with this playstyle in mind, how many of those guns are going to do it? Just the Viper basically and even then, not really. Given "my playstyle", I have a total of 1 gun that can give me a challenge, 1 that could be argued is average, and 3 that make it steamrolled.

People also aren't going to keep coming up with new ways of gimping myself to make the game harder and harder(We actually had a thread on that and posted youtube videos of us doing it), they're just going to go play something else that has the challenge built in.

I would tend to agree that sameness is boring, which is great because I'm not asking for it to be the exact same. I'm asking for balance, which isn't homogenization. Things can fill different roles and have different strengths, weaknesses, and functionality, but everything should be effective is some regards, and actually have a weakness of some kind.

Modifié par Cyonan, 31 mai 2012 - 01:01 .

[neteng101]

Cyonan wrote...

Balancing(Which apparently a lot of people forget includes buffing as well =P) would let you choose the weapon that fits your playstyle and still get a challenge out of it.

So basically you're saying if you're good, you need your weapons to be weaker.  But what about a lesser player that needs the weapon to compensate for their weakness?  They could have the same playstyle, but need some sort of handicap (like a better weapon) to help them out.

You are being utterly selfish if you think about it then like I said, because you're projecting what you want...  and this has an impact on others.  It punishes them basically.  Yes you might make some weaker weapons a bit more usable, but at the same time you take away their crutches.

I would tend to agree that sameness is boring, which is great because I'm not asking for it to be the exact same. I'm asking for balance, which isn't homogenization. Things can fill different roles and have different strengths, weaknesses, and functionality, but everything should be effective is some regards, and actually have a weakness of some kind.

They all hurt the enemy don't they?  Have different fire rates, magazine sizes, etc.  So what's your problem then?  You are asking for sameness.  You're just phrasing it differently but that's what it amounts to.  They're all effective, just at different levels of effectiveness.  What you really want is relative sameness of effectiveness.  You're asking for boring.  You're also pulling away some lesser skilled player's crutches.

It is selfish, and you just want the game to be more of a personal challenge, while you want to eat the cake at the same time so you also want the useless items in your equipment to be more useful.  Just admit that this is out of a selfish desire...  which is pretty much what all complains about things being overpowered on the forums stem from.  People are jealous, people are selfish, people want a challenge, etc...  but then, someone else suffers.

[Cyonan]

neteng101 wrote...

So basically you're saying if you're good, you need your weapons to be weaker. But what about a lesser player that needs the weapon to compensate for their weakness? They could have the same playstyle, but need some sort of handicap (like a better weapon) to help them out.

You are being utterly selfish if you think about it then like I said, because you're projecting what you want... and this has an impact on others. It punishes them basically. Yes you might make some weaker weapons a bit more usable, but at the same time you take away their crutches.

That's what they have difficulties for. You choose the difficulty level that is appropriate for your skill level. I am always going to find bronze easy, and I have no issues with that, because I have gold.

Personally, I wouldn't even have an issue if they all awarded the same credits/hour(Though it would be a massive about of rage on the forums from others, probably). Gold is supposed to be played by the people who want to be challenged, rather than by the people who want to maximize their credits to play more of the RNG store.

They all hurt the enemy don't they? Have different fire rates, magazine sizes, etc. So what's your problem then? You are asking for sameness. You're just phrasing it differently but that's what it amounts to. They're all effective, just at different levels of effectiveness. What you really want is relative sameness of effectiveness. You're asking for boring. You're also pulling away some lesser skilled player's crutches.

It is selfish, and you just want the game to be more of a personal challenge, while you want to eat the cake at the same time so you also want the useless items in your equipment to be more useful. Just admit that this is out of a selfish desire... which is pretty much what all complains about things being overpowered on the forums stem from. People are jealous, people are selfish, people want a challenge, etc... but then, someone else suffers.

I am asking for relevatively equal levels of power yes. That does not have to equal everything being the same, and no matter how many times you say that it is you're still going to be wrong about it.

It may knock a few people out of gold, but is everyone required to be capable of beating gold or something? We realized a very long time ago that different people have different levels of skill, and created the workaround that we call difficulty levels. It used to work really good, too.

What I want is for everyone to be able to have a build that suits their playstyle rather than a playstyle that suits the best build, and to be able to play the difficulty that suits their skill so they're having fun. What I personally find fun is challenge, and so do a lot of players. I acknowledge that not everyone wants it, and that's why you have easy, medium, and hard.

Modifié par Cyonan, 31 mai 2012 - 01:47 .