Keep fighting the good fight Apl_J.
The main issue is that the balance needs a rethink, not just tinkering with damage, weight and ammo capacity. They were on the right track when they came up with the idea of the weight mechanic, but it needs to actually mean something.
As such what they should have strived to do was make weapon effectiveness actually scale with weight with commons being a little worse than the "average line" and ultra rares a little better. Of course "effectivness" is not exactly scientific, but you can't simply use DPS, single shot damage, or clip burst damage as their should be weapons that do indeed go about their business differently. I realize that people think DPS is not as valuable, but it could be... And of course you have to factor accuracy and total clip capacity.
And that leads into the next thing. Part of the problems with the weapon balance are the classes themselves. You touched on this with the infiltrator vs the soldier, although there are of course other examples. Basically there needs to be a bigger difference in weight capacity among the classes with adepts at the bottom and soldiers at the top. While Soldier's do indeed do decent DPS now (some doing ok burst as well) most aren't really the tanks that you would expect them to be. Infiltrator's should need to be relying more on finesse and tactical judgement for higher survivability, and to some extent they do, but really the differences in the amount of fire that can be taken is pretty small, even on gold, which means the whole invisible mechanic grants a huge benefit.
Another thing that would have been worth consideration is more mobility penalty for using a heavier weapon load (relative to your weight capacity) as well as more severe moving accuracy penalties. This would actually give you a reason to potentially go lighter on mobile classes.
One of the things that they needlessly dropped from the combat mechanics, which would have made finding roles for the weapon classes easier, was the multipliers to defense types. I know some people claim that this is too simple a "rock paper scissors" gimmick, but at least it meant that there was a reason for the classes to exist. SMG's and AR's are the perfect example of classes with little reason for existence in the current state of play. Clearly I don't mean that every weapon in the class is bad, just that most of them are, and even the ones that are good don't give you any tangible benefit over something out of a "win" class. The Hornet, for instance, is pretty capable on Gold, but there isn't much reason to use it other than novelty compared to something like the Carnifex, or perhaps even the Phalanx. If they were great at shield and barrier stripping maybe they could find a role, despite their weaker performance against armor.
The AR's are pretty mediocre overall, but some are worth using. Weirdly many are lighter than pistols... but make up for that by being less useful. That should be flipped around. And I do not say that lightly.
Only one quote I saw I care to address directly.
The difficulty level doesn't compensate that some people lack certain skills. A bad sniper that can't aim well is better off with a weapon like the Krysae, regardless if they're playing on Bronze or Gold. The weapon/crutch helps these folks. To deny them that, is just a selfish act. We can choose not to use this weapon if we don't like it.
Perhaps the most ridiculous reasoning I have seen regarding balance. A sniper that can't aim needs to learn how to aim. There should not be "crutch" weapons in the game, or if there are they should not be as effective as a weapon that takes some modicum of skill to use.
Modifié par capn233, 01 juin 2012 - 08:20 .
Retour en haut
leave up to their teammates.
