254 réponses à ce sujet

[Rifneno]

InfamousResult wrote...

Show me some math, hombre.

Do your own math. I'm not going to debate whether the krysae needed to be nerfed. You're dodging the point by trying to make it about that. And the point is clear and concise: if they make a major nerf it means either they screwed up by introducing something very overpowered, or they screwed up by making something very weak. There is no third option because they've officially gone with both extremes.

[InfamousResult]

dday3six wrote...

So I find it quite hypocritical that you feel it's your place to instruct others on how or when to apply tact.

I respond to those who show their butt by showing mine.

Is it hypocritical?

Yes.

Do I care what those people think?

No.

[Angel Beats]

MingoStarr wrote...

I say 1.5! (As in +50%)
Not too powerful this way, but still gives a bonus for a good shot.
Even 1.25 would be awesome!

1.5x seems a little to much considering what type of bonuses you could possibly stack. Plus anything that isn't single fire gets a major boost.

Geth Primes are the easiest, so a 1.1x.
Brutes get a 1.2x.
Banshees get a 1.3x.
Atlases a 1.2x as well. Considering they have the most health and shields out of all boss enemies. Plus a bigger "headshot" target area.

[InfamousResult]

Rifneno wrote...

Do your own math.

Nope. Ain't my math, son- it's yours.

[Rifneno]

InfamousResult wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

Do your own math.

Nope. Ain't my math, son- it's yours.

Still dodging.  Pathetic.

[InfamousResult]

Rifneno wrote...

Still dodging.  Pathetic.

As I recall, the original point was that the customer shouldn't have shown their butt at all, regardless of whether they think Bioware screwed up or not. And you did not address that, so would it not be you dodging the point?

And now you have the gumption to call somebody else "pathetic".

I don't think these forums are the right place for you, friend.

[Tankcommander]

Relix28 wrote...

Brenon Holmes wrote...

Why do you think headshots were removed on the big creatures?

To make them more tedious to kill?

Yup. I used to not mind fighting bosses, they spiced it up, but now they are giant annoying bullet sponges. Cheap shots that always hit through cover, and I can empty clip after clip into them without them dying. Bleh.

[Adamantium93]

Why not just make the weak spots smaller?

Like say headshot damage on an atlas only works when you hit where the head of the pilot is.

Or headshot damage on a prime only works if you hit the red light.

[IXI Jacen IXI]

Adamantium93 wrote...

Why not just make the weak spots smaller?

Like say headshot damage on an atlas only works when you hit where the head of the pilot is.

Or headshot damage on a prime only works if you hit the red light.

Would probably be much easier to impliment.

[Mightyg]

Obviously depends on the size of the target and how fast they can move. Additional weak points would also be interesting for faster staggers and damage. Tell me you guys haven't thought of firing bullets up the Atlas back fan.

[Talhydras]

Mightyg wrote...

Obviously depends on the size of the target and how fast they can move. Additional weak points would also be interesting for faster staggers and damage. Tell me you guys haven't thought of firing bullets up the Atlas back fan.

Back in the beta I did it all the time lol. Faster/more reliable staggers, or targets that only activate their bonus damage if hit by snipers, might be pretty fun. Because after all, any bonus damage area that can be accessed by any weapon will still leave snipers behinds Piranhas and Claymores because they can be made fairly accurate and still do wildly greater damage.

[Sacramentum]

Brenon Holmes wrote...

soldo9149 wrote...

So it would take longer for use to kill them.

Sort of... it's because they're (generally) easier to headshot and we had no way of controlling the headshot multilplier ona per-creature basis. And the headshot multiplier is goofy (3.5x or something like that?), intentionally - because it's normally somewhat harder to do (on a normal creature).

That said, I think it's something we're interested in - as headshots are always nice... if it was to be done, it would probably have to be implemented in such a way as to give us control over the multiplier per creature though.

What do you folks think would be a fair multiplier?

Atheosis wrote...

Beacuse you guys don't think things through a lot of the time?

K. Guess we won't talk about this then. Later.

I think if you guys add headshots to the bosses(which you should do) you need to make them only deal 2x damage, instead of 3.5 like you said.
The heads on the Geth prime and the Banshee are obvious spots, but I think the Atlas should have the vent on its back as its weak point. During campaign when you fight the Atlas on Sur Kesh the vent seems to be highlighted in the cutscene, so I always thought that would be a weak point.

[Strict31]

MingoStarr wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

It comes with the job.  Right after putting in a major nerf, people are going to be angry.  And why shouldn't they be?  BW is the ones who screwed up.  If a dev comes in here now and walks off in a huff on the entire community because of one rude person a few hours after angering a good portion of the fanbase, then he wasn't serious about any changes anyway.

We are playing THEIR game! They don't have to talk to us about the details what-so-ever! Him asking our opinion doesn't mean he was ever serious about a change or not, he simply gave us the privilege to state our thoughts and we stomped on it like a child with a temper tantrum.

You know...everyone should talk to people the way they'd like people to talk to them. Most people do this face-to-face, because if they don't, they could get punched in the f*ckin' mouth. On the Internet, this possibility is considerable less likely, so people feel greater freedom to act like they've got an ass for a mouth.

While I think BW's decision to remove headshots was...not a good one...I'm not gonna be a d*ck about it.

HOWEVER...

We're not playing their game. We're playing the game that nearly every single one of us spent our hard-earned money to purchase. Ass holes or not, we're the customers. I'm not gonna drop any bullsh*t about the customer always being right, but the customer always does deserve to at least be heard.

No one can afford us the privilege to state our thoughts because we've already purchased the ability to state our thoughts.

What they don't have to give us is any say-so in the design of their product. They may have access to information we do not, and as such, it is what it is. But a company that does not at least listen to feedback from its customer base will not long retain that customer base.

I'm not saying a dev has to sit here and eat sh*t. Maybe that guy had a bad day and that one poster was the last f*ckin' straw. But at the same time, customers have paid for the right to at least be heard.

[MChang1984]

Brenon Holmes wrote...

Why do you think headshots were removed on the big creatures?

Seems like an abrupt change in gameplay to me and you always had this ability in Single Player.

How hard is it for a programmer to declare a new multiplier variable in raw code?

If you are saying you have

int headShotMultiplier = 3.5;

you are saying it is too hard to have another variable for headshots say...

int bossHeadShotMultiplier = 1.5;

That's hard? I don't think so.

I personally believe that for bosses the damage should be at least 50% more than base damage. In otherwords, tone it down but don't remove it.

[Siegdrifa]

Brenon Holmes wrote...

soldo9149 wrote...

So it would take longer for use to kill them.

Sort of... it's because they're (generally) easier to headshot and we had no way of controlling the headshot multilplier ona per-creature basis. And the headshot multiplier is goofy (3.5x or something like that?), intentionally - because it's normally somewhat harder to do (on a normal creature).

That said, I think it's something we're interested in - as headshots are always nice... if it was to be done, it would probably have to be implemented in such a way as to give us control over the multiplier per creature though.

What do you folks think would be a fair multiplier?

Atheosis wrote...

Beacuse you guys don't think things through a lot of the time?

K. Guess we won't talk about this then. Later.

IMO a fair headshot multiplier on boss could be X1.5
They need to stay a pain, but i like to go for head shot on anything. Playng an infiltrator and remembering how easy it was to get ride of them before doesn't make me want to go back, especialy that now we are used to, but yhea, i want to feel rewarded a little for shooting the weak spot, so X1.5 for me would be enough.

[Sihmm]

When considering a multiplier, bear in mind that appropriate weak spots tend to be tough to hit in battle conditions with screen shake, incoming fire, smoke on the field, time pressure from flanking enemies, etc. There has to be enough incentive to aim for a harder-to-hit weak spot to make it worth the risk of missing.

1.5x seems reasonable, if you got only perfect "headshots" you'd be killing the target at most a third faster than otherwise. Less in real terms considering you're usually not just using gunfire and usually not just getting headshots.

[galaxygrunt]

Instead of removing weak spots on bosses they could have just allowed normal damage for headshots and half-damage for bodyshots. It would have made bosses tougher, yet would still have given a reason to aim for something other than center mass--or an ankle...

[phantom121294]

Brenon Holmes wrote...

soldo9149 wrote...

So it would take longer for use to kill them.

Sort of... it's because they're (generally) easier to headshot and we had no way of controlling the headshot multilplier ona per-creature basis. And the headshot multiplier is goofy (3.5x or something like that?), intentionally - because it's normally somewhat harder to do (on a normal creature).

That said, I think it's something we're interested in - as headshots are always nice... if it was to be done, it would probably have to be implemented in such a way as to give us control over the multiplier per creature though.

What do you folks think would be a fair multiplier?

Atheosis wrote...

Beacuse you guys don't think things through a lot of the time?

K. Guess we won't talk about this then. Later.

Dont leave why dont you sit down and we can have some coffee and talk about headshot multipliers.

[Doc-Jek]

Because Javalin was useful then

[bob2.0]

There are people in this thread, that when tasked with building a robot for the sole purpose of combat, would put the processor and vital computer parts in the head, instead of the heavily armored torso.

[GeneralElectric]

A headshot multiplier on bosses would be fantastic. You could bring back Geth Prime head explosions! If you have a way of limiting the size of the "sweet spot," then a 1.5 multiplier could be warranted. Maybe 1.1 to 1.25 otherwise...

Modifié par GeneralElectric, 25 juillet 2012 - 03:59 .

[realgundam]

Brenon Holmes wrote...


Sort of... it's because they're (generally) easier to headshot and we had no way of controlling the headshot multilplier ona per-creature basis. And the headshot multiplier is goofy (3.5x or something like that?), intentionally - because it's normally somewhat harder to do (on a normal creature).

That said, I think it's something we're interested in - as headshots are always nice... if it was to be done, it would probably have to be implemented in such a way as to give us control over the multiplier per creature though.

What do you folks think would be a fair multiplier?

I think 2x is a far number if not minimum 1.5x. it really is boring just aiming for center mass and wait until it dies.
On top of HS, I would like to see more strategic spots for increase damage for bosses, like the Atlas plats (and back vent while we're at it), Prime's tubings, etc.
Even better if we can add some directional mulitplier so mobs take more damage from the side and more from the back. This promote strategic placement of players and flanking tactics, instead of always just camping and shooting. This will make the MP SOOOOO much more fun. seriously.
I know this is much work, but probably a good idea for a large patch down the road.


Just making enemies toughter and toughter isn't fun. All you making is for players to shoot longer. However if you add in mechanics to overcome the challenges to reward skilled player, it will be a whole other level of enjoyment.
Also adding some better AI teamwork on higher level will be acutally fun and challenging.

Modifié par realgundam, 25 juillet 2012 - 04:00 .

[Lars Honeytoast]

Brenon Holmes wrote...

soldo9149 wrote...

So it would take longer for use to kill them.

Sort of... it's because they're (generally) easier to headshot and we had no way of controlling the headshot multilplier ona per-creature basis. And the headshot multiplier is goofy (3.5x or something like that?), intentionally - because it's normally somewhat harder to do (on a normal creature).

That said, I think it's something we're interested in - as headshots are always nice... if it was to be done, it would probably have to be implemented in such a way as to give us control over the multiplier per creature though.

What do you folks think would be a fair multiplier?

Atheosis wrote...

Beacuse you guys don't think things through a lot of the time?

K. Guess we won't talk about this then. Later.

Sorry, it looks like a lot of the community doesn't keep their manners when they come on the internet.


That being said, I think a 2x multiplier would be fair. Just not having one at all makes them seem odd, and you have to aim less, you know what I mean?

[Heisenberg]

I think a decent half measure would be to give players the 20% (stacking) headshot bonuses from the racial passive tree and abilities like tactical scan and marksman. This would add true value to those skills and warrant more thought when speccing a character out.

[Mgamerz]

Brenon Holmes wrote...

soldo9149 wrote...

So it would take longer for use to kill them.

Sort of... it's because they're (generally) easier to headshot and we had no way of controlling the headshot multilplier ona per-creature basis. And the headshot multiplier is goofy (3.5x or something like that?), intentionally - because it's normally somewhat harder to do (on a normal creature).

That said, I think it's something we're interested in - as headshots are always nice... if it was to be done, it would probably have to be implemented in such a way as to give us control over the multiplier per creature though.

What do you folks think would be a fair multiplier?

Atheosis wrote...

Beacuse you guys don't think things through a lot of the time?

K. Guess we won't talk about this then. Later.

........ =(
1.5x damage (50% boost)