495 réponses à ce sujet

[Sulaco_7]

Tallgeese_VII wrote...

2 more weeks of garbage status confirmed today.
Sad.

That's being optimistic, actually.  I don't think this gun is going to get another change, even if there are anymore balance changes.

When Eric gives his opinion about a gun (Typhoon, Spitfire), he seems pretty committed to it.

[Eric Fagnan]

Flambrose wrote...

Eric Fagnan wrote...

This is simply an error with the visual bar in the menu, and it should have no impact on the balance of the weapon. In fact, we don't plug in stats into a magic formula to deteremine balance anyway. All of our balance testing is done in a real level against real enemies, so in the end the value of the stats doesn't really matter; the only thing that matters is how the weapon performs in a real game.

This explains a lot about the balancing process for the game.

I would prefer balance by formula, myself.

Testing in game doesn't mean not doing number analysis, it just means we track real damage done to enemies rather than theoretical formulas. Many of our weapons have very exotic mechanics that prevent us from coming up with a single magic formula to tell us if a weapon is balanced or not.

[Cyonan]

Eric Fagnan wrote...

Testing in game doesn't mean not doing number analysis, it just means we track real damage done to enemies rather than theoretical formulas. Many of our weapons have very exotic mechanics that prevent us from coming up with a single magic formula to tell us if a weapon is balanced or not.

As the guy who runs the spreadsheets I'll weigh in on this:

I have always said that there is a reason that we call it theorycrafting, because it is only in theory. As a programmer I am very much aware of the fact that what should happen in theory and what does happen in reality are two very different things(If it wasn't, my job would be a lot easier).

A good example are people found often quoting reload cancelled DPS values, which are actually impossible for a human being to achieve in-game. I put those values on the sheets to give a general idea as to how something is going to perform, not to tell you what gun is mathematically the best in the game, because the answer to that is that there isn't one.

I see a use for theorycrafting, but it's not ever going to trump in-game experience.

Now, the RNG hasn't seen fit to give me a Spitfire, so I don't actually know how it performs in-game. I wont comment on that, but I will say that balance is not entirely objective and thus cannot be figured out with a complicated mathematical formula. I wish that it could be some days, but it can't.

For example, it would seem that BioWare places a bigger weight on the ammo capacity of a weapon, while I would not when talking about things like Harrier(at least in MP). Neither of us are necessarily wrong, but rather we just have different opinions on the matter. I can't deny that I do have to visit the ammo box more often while using a Harrier, but I can't mathematically prove that the Harrier is better than say, the Lancer(I actually like the Lancer more because I'm nostalgic like that).

Am I going to agree that the Spitfire is fine when I play with it? To be honest I'm not really expecting that I will, but I could always be proven wrong. There are plenty of guns that I'm not a fan of that the BSN thinks are amazing(The Talon is one) and there are guns that I think are quite good that the BSN thinks are terrible(a lot of them are Assault Rifles). I would probably suggest taking a look at the fact that we have in-game tests showing 600 RPM while Eric is saying it fires at 650 RPM, however.

Either way I can't objectively say that it is wrong.

Doing balance requires asking yourself where you stand on a lot of points, and there is no right or wrong answer to any of those questions.

but people will be very quick to tell you that you're wrong if they don't agree with you =P

[Trogdorx]

Eric Fagnan wrote...

Testing in game doesn't mean not doing number analysis, it just means we track real damage done to enemies rather than theoretical formulas. Many of our weapons have very exotic mechanics that prevent us from coming up with a single magic formula to tell us if a weapon is balanced or not.

I don't want to sound disrespectful but this thing is so weak that it's hard for me and others to believe that you actually tested this thing ingame. What did you test it on, bronze husks? Yup, it kills bronze husks.

Try using it on a gold boss without any consumables.... you'll be shooting it until the round is over.

Or rather, one of two things will happen.
One, you'll die because it isn't possible to peek out of cover with this gun, you always go into "aim out of cover" mode, which exposes you to being shot to pieces while you empty the gun's enormous clip.
Or two, your teammates will end up killing the boss for you.

Unless you buff this gun's damage to the point where it's the massive death hose it seems intended to be (due to its very significant penalties), it's absolutely useless for every class.

I want to love this gun. Eric pls.

[Lucky]

Mr. Fagnan I don't understand why you choose to respond to someone who criticizes the process you take in balancing weapons, which is obviously subjective and not something they can actually say you are right or wrong about. Yet remain totally silent towards the comment that you are objectively wrong about the spitfire's ROF in game.

Please at least tell us that you will look into the issue which the OP, and peddro, have brought up, namely that the Spitfire has a ROF of 600 and you believe that it is higher.

[Lathlaer]

I just gave it to my Destroyer without Adrenaline mod. The horror.

Seriously, either boost the RoF so the kit it was made for (Juggernaut) can use it more effectively or reduce/eliminate the speed penalty, because the kits that can make it work are way too slow with this gun.

[Lucky]

Trogdorx wrote...

Or rather, one of two things will happen.
One, you'll die because it isn't possible to peek out of cover with this gun, you always go into "aim out of cover" mode, which exposes you to being shot to pieces while you empty the gun's enormous clip.

Not that I disagree that it could use further buffing, but what in the world makes you think you can't use right hand advantage with this gun?

[BlackDahlia424]

Cyonan wrote...

Eric Fagnan wrote...

Testing in game doesn't mean not doing number analysis, it just means we track real damage done to enemies rather than theoretical formulas. Many of our weapons have very exotic mechanics that prevent us from coming up with a single magic formula to tell us if a weapon is balanced or not.

I would probably suggest taking a look at the fact that we have in-game tests showing 600 RPM while Eric is saying it fires at 650 RPM, however.

Eric, please look at this.

[Trogdorx]

rlucht wrote...

Trogdorx wrote...

Or rather, one of two things will happen.
One, you'll die because it isn't possible to peek out of cover with this gun, you always go into "aim out of cover" mode, which exposes you to being shot to pieces while you empty the gun's enormous clip.

Not that I disagree that it could use further buffing, but what in the world makes you think you can't use right hand advantage with this gun?

1) That doesn't work if the only cover available is a low wall.
2) When I do that, my Hawk missile launcher doesn't fire, which seems to do more damage than the Spitfire.

[Flambrose]

rlucht wrote...

Mr. Fagnan I don't understand why you choose to respond to someone who criticizes the process you take in balancing weapons, which is obviously subjective and not something they can actually say you are right or wrong about. Yet remain totally silent towards the comment that you are objectively wrong about the spitfire's ROF in game.

Please at least tell us that you will look into the issue which the OP, and peddro, have brought up, namely that the Spitfire has a ROF of 600 and you believe that it is higher.

I'd rather express criticism than lick their boots. I'm completely honest when I say I don't like some of the balancing decisions, or lackthereof more importantly. I'll acknowledge good balance changes; the arc pistol charge buff was one of my favorites in all of MP.

Eric and co. are evidently happy with the performance of the gun as is. Whether it actually fires at 600 or 650rpm wouldn't hold any importance to that judgement, at least assuming the gun is the same in their test version as it is in ours.

I will say this gun is pretty good... on a TGI. With adrenaline III. Not having that speed penalty would go a long way to making it usable in general, as I've pointed out in the past.

[Kittstalkur]

Flambrose wrote...

I'd rather express criticism than lick their boots. I'm completely honest when I say I don't like some of the balancing decisions, or lackthereof more importantly. I'll acknowledge good balance changes; the arc pistol charge buff was one of my favorites in all of MP.

Eric and co. are evidently happy with the performance of the gun as is. Whether it actually fires at 600 or 650rpm wouldn't hold any importance to that judgement, at least assuming the gun is the same in their test version as it is in ours.

I will say this gun is pretty good... on a TGI. With adrenaline III. Not having that speed penalty would go a long way to making it usable in general, as I've pointed out in the past.

It really carries far too many penalties to be all that usable outside of the Juggernaut, and in my opinion at least, the Juggernaut needs burst DPS over sustained DPS, and the Spitfire only offers sustained DPS.

[Lucky]

Sorry Flambrose, no offense was meant to you, I simply can't understand why he is defending his subjective decision making process while refusing to comment on the simple objective facts. You are of course within your rights to criticize their balancing process, I am just frustrated that he won't comment on the tests showing its actual ROF which IMO should be taken into account in balancing decisions.

[JaimasOfRaxis]

Eric Fagnan wrote...

Testing in game doesn't mean not doing number analysis, it just means we track real damage done to enemies rather than theoretical formulas. Many of our weapons have very exotic mechanics that prevent us from coming up with a single magic formula to tell us if a weapon is balanced or not.

Forgive me if I sound curt on this one, but at what point does that have anything to do with the current fire-rate of the Spitfire being about 20% lower than it's allegedly supposed to be - a change that has adversely impacted its firepower? This is a weapon already chock-full of drawbacks (sheer weight, slows down firer, et al) with only really one redeeming quality - shield disruption - in exchange. That "unlisted" loss of fire-rate gives it substantially-worse damage than literally every other rifle in its class (Ultra Rare), and makes it notably outshined by several rare weapons.

Modifié par JaimasOfRaxis, 12 mars 2013 - 11:44 .

[sobit]

Eric Fagnan wrote...

Flambrose wrote...

Eric Fagnan wrote...

This is simply an error with the visual bar in the menu, and it should have no impact on the balance of the weapon. In fact, we don't plug in stats into a magic formula to deteremine balance anyway. All of our balance testing is done in a real level against real enemies, so in the end the value of the stats doesn't really matter; the only thing that matters is how the weapon performs in a real game.

This explains a lot about the balancing process for the game.

I would prefer balance by formula, myself.

Testing in game doesn't mean not doing number analysis, it just means we track real damage done to enemies rather than theoretical formulas. Many of our weapons have very exotic mechanics that prevent us from coming up with a single magic formula to tell us if a weapon is balanced or not.

uh what?! I have always been under the Impression that many guns could only be left in such a horrible state, because there is a magic formula that dictates it. You really used all those guns and considered them to be in balance? wow.

[Cyonan]

JaimasOfRaxis wrote...
Forgive me if I sound curt on this one, but at what point does that have anything to do with the current fire-rate of the Spitfire being about 20% lower than it's allegedly supposed to be - a change that has adversely impacted its firepower? This is a weapon already chock-full of drawbacks (sheer weight, slows down firer, et al) with only really one redeeming quality - shield disruption - in exchange. That "unlisted" loss of fire-rate gives it substantially-worse damage than literally every other rifle in its class, and makes it notably outshined by several rare weapons.

It's actually about 7.7% lower than it should be.

To be honest, today's buff increased the damage output more than fixing the rate of fire would have.

[Feneckus]

I used my Spitfire X on a Geth Juggernaut vs Reapers on Gold.

It was still beyond painful. Ravagers would take 10s to go down. The Phaeston could do better.

How can BW think it's worthy of being an Ultra Rare ? That doesn't make any sense.

[Sulaco_7]

I think the disconnect is that the devs probably play with a Spitfire that has different stats in their test environments (i.e., RoF 650 in their test environment vs just 600 in the real game).

Sadly, since this gun performs well in their test environments, I doubt we will be able to convince them that it sucks.

[BridgeBurner]

Got a video uploading.

Draw your own conclusions, but all I'm saying is that the spitfire is NOT a bad gun.

Used it on geth soldier, AP ammo IV, targetting VI III, extended magazine, extended barrel. It was making a mess of everything. Does less damage versus armour than the typhoon, but the spitfire can clear an entire spawn faster, without ever having to reload once... unlike the typhoon.

Reducing the movement speed penalty would make it possibly the best AR in game for weapons platform characters.

[JaimasOfRaxis]

Cyonan wrote...

JaimasOfRaxis wrote...
Forgive me if I sound curt on this one, but at what point does that have anything to do with the current fire-rate of the Spitfire being about 20% lower than it's allegedly supposed to be - a change that has adversely impacted its firepower? This is a weapon already chock-full of drawbacks (sheer weight, slows down firer, et al) with only really one redeeming quality - shield disruption - in exchange. That "unlisted" loss of fire-rate gives it substantially-worse damage than literally every other rifle in its class, and makes it notably outshined by several rare weapons.

It's actually about 7.7% lower than it should be.

To be honest, today's buff increased the damage output more than fixing the rate of fire would have.

Was going by the original damage/fire rate discovered by the community, so if my math's off, I apologize.

In the end, it's still horrible, and a massive under-achiever for its rarity and weight.

[Lathlaer]

Annomander wrote...

Got a video uploading.

Draw your own conclusions, but all I'm saying is that the spitfire is NOT a bad gun.

Used it on geth soldier, AP ammo IV, targetting VI III, extended magazine, extended barrel. It was making a mess of everything. Does less damage versus armour than the typhoon, but the spitfire can clear an entire spawn faster, without ever having to reload once... unlike the typhoon.

Reducing the movement speed penalty would make it possibly the best AR in game for weapons platform characters.

Yes, I agree. But it was so painful slow on the Destroyer...

Do you use Soldier with or without HM? It seems like a heavy choice in the last progressioin of Hunter Mode. Damage or speed with this rifle

Modifié par Lathlaer, 12 mars 2013 - 11:55 .

[Cyonan]

Annomander wrote...

Got a video uploading.

Draw your own conclusions, but all I'm saying is that the spitfire is NOT a bad gun.

Used it on geth soldier, AP ammo IV, targetting VI III, extended magazine, extended barrel. It was making a mess of everything. Does less damage versus armour than the typhoon, but the spitfire can clear an entire spawn faster, without ever having to reload once... unlike the typhoon.

Reducing the movement speed penalty would make it possibly the best AR in game for weapons platform characters.

I got 200k credits on you being told that it doesn't count because you used consumables and a Geth =P

Still, while I'm not expecting that I'll like it I'm waiting till I unlock the damned thing before drawing a final conclusion on it.

[BridgeBurner]

Cyonan wrote...

Annomander wrote...

Got a video uploading.

Draw your own conclusions, but all I'm saying is that the spitfire is NOT a bad gun.

Used it on geth soldier, AP ammo IV, targetting VI III, extended magazine, extended barrel. It was making a mess of everything. Does less damage versus armour than the typhoon, but the spitfire can clear an entire spawn faster, without ever having to reload once... unlike the typhoon.

Reducing the movement speed penalty would make it possibly the best AR in game for weapons platform characters.

I got 200k credits on you being told that it doesn't count because you used consumables and a Geth =P

Still, while I'm not expecting that I'll like it I'm waiting till I unlock the damned thing before drawing a final conclusion on it.

Heh, yeah, I guess cheating by using an adrenaline module to counteract the speed decrease, and aiming for the head counts as cheating too?

That's BSN's problem. Not every gun will be outstanding on every kit... a misconception perpetrated commonly thanks to a certain Mr. C. Harrier.

[RoundedPlanet88]

Annomander wrote...

Cyonan wrote...

Annomander wrote...

Got a video uploading.

Draw your own conclusions, but all I'm saying is that the spitfire is NOT a bad gun.

Used it on geth soldier, AP ammo IV, targetting VI III, extended magazine, extended barrel. It was making a mess of everything. Does less damage versus armour than the typhoon, but the spitfire can clear an entire spawn faster, without ever having to reload once... unlike the typhoon.

Reducing the movement speed penalty would make it possibly the best AR in game for weapons platform characters.

I got 200k credits on you being told that it doesn't count because you used consumables and a Geth =P

Still, while I'm not expecting that I'll like it I'm waiting till I unlock the damned thing before drawing a final conclusion on it.

Heh, yeah, I guess cheating by using an adrenaline module to counteract the speed decrease, and aiming for the head counts as cheating too?

That's BSN's problem. Not every gun will be outstanding on every kit... a misconception perpetrated commonly thanks to a certain Mr. C. Harrier.

I would argue talon, scorpion, CSMG, and hurricane as well. Of course there`s also the black widow, javelin, and PPR, and typhoon as well. Admittedly, they will perform better on some kits than others, but all are easily useable on less than optimal kits.

[Bechter]

Annomander What about the claymoar?

[Grunt_Platform]

If the gun's good on the Geth Trooper and the Juggernaut, that's enough for me.

Preliminary tests with a low level spitfire using EB+AP and incendiary ammo were promising. Probably not as potent as Annomander's loadout, will have to try that out too. ... Probably not taking it to Plat until I get it to at least V.

'Course, people who hate using consumables will probably be missing out. Nevermind if a gun benefits significantly more from them than others would.

Modifié par EvanKester, 13 mars 2013 - 12:12 .