So since VS will be the only ones getting Damage Degradation...

[mefy]

Well, this is just speculatory of course... however I am just trying to point out possible flaws in game mechanics that may lead to more serious balancing issues between empires.

One of the main advantages I much appreciated about the VS in PS1 was their effective range on most weapons exceeded the other empires, most notably the Lancer and Magrider. Lancer was really the only AV weapon that required any sort of skill, and had a moderate to hard learning curve on it... however once mastered to an extent it became a really nasty deterrent to vehicles and even aircraft if you knew what you were doing.

Magrider, well it was a sniper tank.... only when compared to the other two however. The COF issue sucked because in a tank duel you would have to get as much range on them as possible to have the upper hand, and the COF was pretty big past 200m. But regardless, still a good tank with good AV/AA capabilities.

Now looking at PS2, it seems that if we are the only empire to have damage degradation while the other two simply get damage drop or *arc* to their weapons/cannons, but will still presumably do full damage if they actually do hit their target at range.

First possible flaw: Once NC/TR master this effect to an extent, will their weapons become superior at range compared to the VS weapons, since the VS weapons will suffer from damage degradation no matter what, while TR/NC simply has to learn how much higher to aim at certain ranges?

This suggests that the VS will need to be within a certain range to do full damage, but if you ask me this kind of takes a new turn in the empires 'advantages' and seems more like an NC theme if you ask me, the guys who are supposed to be 'in your face' with the most armor and biggest guns for quick burst damage... seems appropriate for NC right? Will the VS still have a formidable range advantage at a certain distance where they will be able to do full damage and still be able to keep a good range on the enemy?

Second flaw: With Cone of Fire game mechanics, this will be a double blow to the VS with their 'effective range' issues... as mentioned earlier it was possible to keep a good range on enemy tanks in a Magrider, however the COF was rather large and it really wasn't a 'sniper tank' like most people claimed it to be, you basically had to just put the COF over the target and hope that 1/25 of the shots would finally hit it. Aircraft at range was a pain as well. With damage degradation AND COF issues, PLUS other empires simply having bullet drop on their weapons instead of damage degradation as well, I see a whole storm of crap that could happen in these type of situations... plus if the Mag is supposedly going to be gunned by the driver, and the Heavy Rail Beam being where the PPA used to be, meaning the driver will not be able to rotate the main gun at all... it sounds like it's going to be a real pain in the ass for Magrider drivers to compensate for damage degradation, COF and driving at the same time while hopefully keeping a decent range on other vehicles. *sigh*

I still think all tanks should require a driver and a gunner... why are we taking a more rambo, killwhore take again? Im confused :confused:

Also, why not just make the Heavy Rail Beam into a cannon and subject it to gravity as well? And for all you nerds out there, photons are also subject to gravity as well so dont tell me that 'beam weaponry' shouldn't have a bullet drop.... plus aren't the VS weapons simply kinetic darts being propelled by beams?

Anyways... time to speculate away again :lol:

[Ailos]

Photons don't have mass, so they are only subject to the bend in space time caused by gravity, which is several thousand orders of magnitude less than actual particle weaponry.

Also, I think the implication with most VS weapons is that they will have nowhere near as bad a cone of fire as us. Also, they mentioned the kickback effect being present - your aim being pushed up as a result of recoil, which I would imagine would also be much much smaller for you all.

Also, stop whining, you already have the scythe.

[mefy]

No one has any clue how any of the aircraft really work in game yet:confused:

I was directing this topic more towards tanks, where I see the most potential issue with this.

[Death2All]

Of course, it's far too early to speculate on how exactly the weapons behave. We've only been given a brief slice of information on how VS weapons work. We still have no idea what range damage begins to drop off.

Also, there's supposedly a lot of customization and talent trees this time around. Perhaps you could put attachments or spec into your Pulsar tree and increase your effective range or lesser the effects of damage degradation.

Again, too early to speculate, all we can do is wait or hope for a follow up from the devs who've been more than obliged to answer questions on the forums.

[Brusi]

I think the point is that its always going to be pretty hard to consistantly hit an arced weapon on moving targets versus a weapon that shoots right where you tell it too.

It might balance out just fine if you are hitting every shot at long range and your enemy is hitting ever 2nd or 3rd shot

[mefy]

I think the point is that its always going to be pretty hard to consistantly hit an arced weapon on moving targets versus a weapon that shoots right where you tell it too.


Not exactly with COF in place.

[Raka Maru]

What you are referring to is gravitational lensing. Photons will travel straight unless influenced by high mass the size of galaxies and to a very small extent the moon does this to light when seen in a total eclipse. In the range of our battlefields, this would be nothing. :)

I could see some special armor in the cash shop that could counter beam weapons at the expense of being weaker to projectiles, but that's another topic.

[CutterJohn]

Photons don't have mass, so they are only subject to the bend in space time caused by gravity, which is several thousand orders of magnitude less than actual particle weaponry.

Also, I think the implication with most VS weapons is that they will have nowhere near as bad a cone of fire as us. Also, they mentioned the kickback effect being present - your aim being pushed up as a result of recoil, which I would imagine would also be much much smaller for you all.

If you're going to try to use science to justify something, at least don't use bad science. Everything is affected exactly the same by gravity. Including energy. A beam of light is pulled down at 9.8 m/s^2. Its just going so damned fast you don't see it, since its 300,000 km away after a second.

So. Hitscan, and no drop, or no hitscan, and bullet drop.

[dsi]

Why would NC/TR ballistic weapons hit for full damage at all ranges? AFAIK we aren't fighting in a vacuum.

[xSlideShow]

I think it will be fine. We don't know anything about travel time of cannon fire or anything. If the Magrider's shots travel as quickly as they use to. And the other guns travel at about the same rate. Then I think we'll be fine, since it's going to be much harder to aim.

Either way though, it's still going to be a lot harder for the other tanks to aim than the mag anyway. So it doesn't matter. I really think people are just getting all worked up about this. Trust the devs. The mag is still going to have an advantage at range. No bullet drop is pretty big.

Although, I'm probably just flaming at this point... Cause I didn't read the post I just read the topic. Already tired of reading this same thing. I get it's a pretty big difference between the empires... but was everyone that excited to have bullet drop or something?!

[SKYeXile]

im sure projectile weapons will have damage degradation too, or that would just be silly every FPS has damage degradation at range...well every decent one.

anyway, lets leave the balance discussions for beta.

[MadPenguin]

Have they said all vanu weapons for infantry, tanks and air have damage degredation? On the last game some VS weapons like pulsar had damage degredation i thought, but not all of them did.

[wildcat140679]

I understand what your saying and would agree with you would it be based on more accurate data.

Very little is known about weapon specific stats, for all we know VS there weapons are more accurate, less recoil and have a much higher bullet speed compensating for damage degradation.

I'll just be waiting for beta before I speculate any further about possible game balancing problems. When beta starts we have more accurate data to work with and to draw our conclusions from.

[Khellendros]

Not exactly with COF in place.

Honestly, the PS1 mag was great at sniping, I was picking off snipers on top of mountains when I could only see their heads poking up over the edge. The CoF wasn't debilitating by any means, it was a very potent platform.

[Xyntech]

I'm not gonna worry too much about this until beta. These are easy stats to tweak, so since the devs seem really committed to getting this game right, it should be no problem to perfect it.

[Ailos]

If you're going to try to use science to justify something, at least don't use bad science. Everything is affected exactly the same by gravity. Including energy. A beam of light is pulled down at 9.8 m/s^2. Its just going so damned fast you don't see it, since its 300,000 km away after a second.

Like Raka Maru mentioned, the effect you are referring to is gravitational lensing. It happens not because photons are pulled towards a each other by gravity or towards a planetary surface by gravity but because of the bend in timespace created by a big mass like a star. Because gravity isn't a force but this bending of time space, objects with mass experience a 'pull' that is several billion times stronger than massless objects like photons do. Both planets and energy are affected through the same mechanism, but the magnitude of the effect is very different. Translation: for all practical purposes energy travels straight on our battlefield.

On the other hand, plasma (cold or hot) IS matter, it DOES have mass and it DOES interact with gravity in a similar fashion.

A light bulb, and general radiation has range degradation proportional to the distance squared. A coherent beam like a laser doesnt radiate in a sphere and is subject to range degradation of a very small constant for distance. Translation: your beamers laser won't have any worse of a damage loss at range than a 9 mm round, for the same reason: it isn't a vacuum.

[CutterJohn]

Although, I'm probably just flaming at this point... Cause I didn't read the post I just read the topic. Already tired of reading this same thing. I get it's a pretty big difference between the empires... but was everyone that excited to have bullet drop or something?!

Frankly, I was always rather disappointed my magrider/lancer/etc didn't have bullet drop. Made things too easy. Point, click, hit. :/

[morf]

Everything is affected exactly the same by gravity. Including energy. A beam of light is pulled down at 9.8 m/s^2. Its just going so damned fast you don't see it, since its 300,000 km away after a second.


Ok so if I'm going to shoot at a vanguard at 300,000k I aim 9.8m higher. Got it. Thanks for the tip.

[Elude]

The only way the weapons of the TR/NC will become superior because they have no damage reduction is if everyone on every empire had 100 percent accuracy which is impossible unless you're cheating. No matter how much practice you put into adjusting to bullet drop you will never have the aiming potential of someone who doesn't have bullet drop like the VS.

[dsi]

The only way the weapons of the TR/NC will become superior because they have no damage reduction is if everyone on every empire had 100 percent accuracy which is impossible unless you're cheating. No matter how much practice you put into adjusting to bullet drop you will never have the aiming potential of someone who doesn't have bullet drop like the VS.

But bullets don't fly at a constant speed, they're affected not just by gravity but by drag from the air. (and tons of other things like weapon rifling, production defects, wind outside of the weapon, temperature of the barrel/round, etc) Drag means slower, slower means less kinetic force, less kinetic force means less damage.

[Elude]

But bullets don't fly at a constant speed, they're affected not just by gravity but by drag from the air. (and tons of other things like weapon rifling, production defects, wind outside of the weapon, temperature of the barrel/round, etc) Drag means slower, slower means less kinetic force, less kinetic force means less damage.

IN REAL LIFE!

For all we know the ballistic weapons could still be hitscan, it's easy to simulate bullet drop with hitscan. It's unlikely that the game will have physics as accurate as that considering it's not based on the real world or trying to simulate it and it's an mmo with thousands of people to account for.

[dsi]

IN REAL LIFE!

For all we know the ballistic weapons could still be hitscan, it's easy to simulate bullet drop with hitscan. It's unlikely that the game will have physics as accurate as that considering it's not based on the real world or trying to simulate it and it's an mmo with thousands of people to account for.

That doesn't mean there shouldn't be damage drop off, as most people seem to expect.

[mefy]

confirmed only VS have damage degrad by Tray via twitter.

[RedKnights]

Ok so if I'm going to shoot at a vanguard at 300,000k I aim 9.8m higher. Got it. Thanks for the tip.

Only if the travel time over that firing arc is exactly one second, then again I can't tell if you're trolling or not... which scares me most.

In other news the VS Pulsar and Beamer has damage degredation in PS1 so there's no real change. And our CoF was pretty bad, so it's an overall buff i'd say :D

[Erendil]

In other news the VS Pulsar and Beamer has damage degredation in PS1 so there's no real change. And our CoF was pretty bad, so it's an overall buff i'd say :D

Except that the TR & NC firearms won't have DD in PS2, but they did in PS1. Granted most of the time the DD wasn't as bad for them as it was for VS weapons tho...

I dunno, I just don't like the idea of being penalized for being able to make long range shots... Then there are ammo considerations as well, since at long range the Pulsar will most likely need to fire more shots to get a kill than the Cycler/Gauss. But then, maybe the Pulsar will get the same self-charging energy cells that the Beamer has... :D

[mefy]

accirding to Trays tweet, theoretically the guass/cycler will do full damage at great ranged, provided with less accuracy... so basically it's a crap shoot... you spray a bunch of lead and hope one of them connects in the head and you'll probably have a kill, whereas VS will have to actually hit the target a lot of times which brings up COF issues and ping.

IMO all weapons should have DD when it comes to MA and stuff or have none of them have it.... just giving it to VS will gimp us... just watch how out of wack it will get. Calling it now.

[Blackwolf]

Not exactly with COF in place.

Weapons with bullet drop off would also be affected by CoF. If you think trying to hit someone with CoF in place was hard, try hiting them while factoring in gravity in addition to CoF. Twice the compensation involved.

Hitting a moving soldier at long range will be very difficult with even minor bullet drop off, but since Vanu weapons won't have this disadvantage, they are going to have a better range advantage against moving targets, stationary targets are another matter though.

OP: My guess is that VS weapons won't start their damage degradation until much further out then PS1. And the balancing factor is easy. We can shoot moving targets far more accurately then they can, but they can shoot stationary targets with more damage then we can. That's how I see this balancing out anyway.

[Erendil]

Weapons with bullet drop off would also be affected by CoF. If you think trying to hit someone with CoF in place was hard, try hiting them while factoring in gravity in addition to CoF. Twice the compensation involved.

Hitting a moving soldier at long range will be very difficult with even minor bullet drop off, but since Vanu weapons won't have this disadvantage, they are going to have a better range advantage against moving targets, stationary targets are another matter though.

OP: My guess is that VS weapons won't start their damage degradation until much further out then PS1. And the balancing factor is easy. We can shoot moving targets far more accurately then they can, but they can shoot stationary targets with more damage then we can. That's how I see this balancing out anyway.

I think you're right on the balance thing. VS weapons will be more accurate so we'll hit more against maneuvering targets, but TR/NC weapons will be able to out-damage us once they've zeroed in on a stationary target. Which is fine by me. :cool:

However, I'm curiuos how much bullet drop there's actually going to be. If it's at all realistic it won't be any more than ~5-8cm/100m with an Gauss/Cycler. This seem to be not too far off based on the Cycler's tracers in Higby's gameplay vid. The traces didn't start to drop noticeably until they were quite far off i nthe distance. So I'm suspicious about how much difference bulle drop will actually make.

Of course, a lot depends on the effective and max ranges of our weapons.. I'm hoping for at least a 50% range increase overall. 100+% increase preferred. :D

I'm also curious about how headshots will be balanced. Are VS weapons going to do less damage on a headshot across the board because they're more accurate?

[ShockFC]

Theoryside

[robocpf1]

EDIT: I was going to rant about science fiction and then I took an arrow to the knee. So here's this smiley face. :D

[Xyntech]

EDIT: I was going to rant about science fiction and then I took an arrow to the knee. So here's this smiley face. :D

V-N-M!