Why more Weapons is the Wrong Idea.

[Baneblade]

I like guns, everybody likes guns... except Figment, but that is another topic. But I think PS2 took the wrong method of approaching how we choose and customize weapons.

The first and most obvious problem is the classification of customizations to overlap when they shouldn't. I dare anyone to explain why an extended magazine should not be usable with a laser sight should not be usable with a foregrip should not be usable with a taclight. Anyway, that is not quite the angle I was aiming for with this thread.

SOE shouldn't be selling us new guns, but rather we should be taking the AR platform approach: Have one base design that is interchangeable to literally fill any role desired. Basically bring the Gauss Rifle, Cycler, and Pulsar to the forefront. I'll use the Gauss for the rest of this thread since I'm NC and I'm not politically correct.

Break down the Gauss Rifle into the base components and you have:

Barrel
Forend
Upper Receiver
Lower Receiver
Buttstock
Trigger Assembly

All of these should be what we customize for different purposes. For example if we want to turn the Gauss into a Battle Rifle, drop in a higher calibre barrel, Upper and Lower. We'd also need to use a different magazine for the larger ammunition. This is all before we get into sights, scopes, lasers, compensators, suppressors, and the like.

To keep class balance mostly intact, simply allow only certain classes to use certain components, such as only HA can elect to use Drum Mags, or Infils are the only ones that can use the Long Rifle Barrels.

Now, what do we do about these weapons we already have? Consolidate them. Identify what makes them unique and let them be a kit to modify the base Gauss.

Other base platforms could be the Jackhammer, MCG, and Lasher.

I'm not sure how easy this was to follow considering I'm sort of paraphrasing what I discussed with outfit mates last night. But the general gist is to focus on modification rather than just adding more guns.

[Chewy]

So, like Blacklight?

[Rolfski]

Did you make this thread as a response to mine (http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?t=53178)?

Anyway, going all Blacklight Retribution style and building your own gun from parts would certainly be nice but probably a too drastic change in the game. I guess I could settle for a system as I suggested (http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?t=53178).

[EvilNinjadude]

For another thread invoking the name Blacklight:Retribution and a subsequent post by me, also visit: http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?p=893968
EDIT: OP of other thread beat me to it. What a strange world this is.

[Graywolves]

Well my main thing with constantly pulling new guns is that it really skews things. When they said they were going to follow something like League of Legends I was really only expecting the cosmetics.

Constantly pulling new champions in that game doesn't work because they're balanced (debatable). IMO the balance comes from the veto/ban on champions in the pick. And then the entire game revolves around farming so w.e I'm done talking about this game.

But you bringing out new weapons all the time just makes me foresee a power creep. Or situations where I really have no clue what weapon anyone is using and it's a huge "well let's see if he kills me or I kill him and we'll know..."

[EvilNinjadude]

But you bringing out new weapons all the time just makes me foresee a power creep. Or situations where I really have no clue what weapon anyone is using and it's a huge "well let's see if he kills me or I kill him and we'll know..."
Quite, quite. And in the end there will be too many similar weapons to remember them all, so they might just ALL be the same, and they look similar in the shop anyway and you can only tell them apart by type unless you're looking REALLY hard at the stats etc etc etc.

Shoving some BL:R into the Blender really wouldn't hurt. As long as they don't make us rent weapon parts, I'd start buying attachments and stuff like a maniac because I could use them on all weapons, they'd start feeling meaningful, and ALL THAT AWESOME STUFF.

[Varsam]

This would be great for everyone but SOE - your plan is difficult to monetize. No money, no planetside.

[Thunderhawk]

I like guns, everybody likes guns... except Figment, but that is another topic."

I genuinely lol'd :)

[Baneblade]

This would be great for everyone but SOE - your plan is difficult to monetize. No money, no planetside.

Not really, just let weapon parts be bought with SC or certs. They get more money out of it then they do with the current model in all likelihood.

[Baneblade]

Did you make this thread as a response to mine (http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?t=53178)?

Generally I make posts in response to threads.

[Mietz]

I've been suggesting this since day 1.

[maradine]

I like Blacklight, but not enough to rip off their weapons system verbatim.

edit: sorry, "borrow".

[Figment]

It is true, I like pies better. Everyone should have a pie in their home.

[Varsam]

Not really, just let weapon parts be bought with SC or certs. They get more money out of it then they do with the current model in all likelihood.

So after you unlock each attachment and platform (which won't take long given the current attachment list), then there's nothing left to monetize, unless you make the unlocks temporary, which is rather unpopular.

[Hamma]

I like this idea and I think it would be a neat system for the game but honestly I don't see it happening it would require some pretty hefty changes.

[Baneblade]

I like Blacklight, but not enough to rip off their weapons system verbatim.

edit: sorry, "borrow".

Hardly a rip off of BR tbh, the AR-15 has been able to do this for years.

I've never played Blacklight in any case.

So after you unlock each attachment and platform (which won't take long given the current attachment list), then there's nothing left to monetize, unless you make the unlocks temporary, which is rather unpopular.

First of all, it is easier to nickel and dime people when you are actually nickel and diming them, not asking them to shell out larger sums of money.

It is also important to keep everything available via certs. Not to mention giving people more options means they spend more money. None of that gimmicky rent business either.

All SOE has to do to make it more of an SC sink is to have more tiers of attachments (adv laser, adv grip, etc). Plus they could let you swap scopes on the fly or switch from the compensator to the suppressor.

There are plenty of other things SOE can and will be adding to bring in the money. For example, I highly suspect they will be letting us turn ourselves into cyborgs at some point. I mean beyond the whole we are nanites thing.

[bpostal]

I like this idea and I think it would be a neat system for the game but honestly I don't see it happening it would require some pretty hefty changes.

Agree. Not to mention that, while cool, would require another dozen loadouts or so to really make it work.

[Rolfski]

Generally I make posts in response to threads.

Why make new posts about something that is already discussed? If someone else already started a discussion about the need for more weapon customization and Blacklight Retribution being the reference, there's really no need to hijack it and start a similar one 10 minutes after it. That's just bad forum etiquette and I'm kinda disappointed Hamma allows this actually.

Anyway, if we can agree that a BL:R system is nice but not likely going to happen, let's go back to my original suggestion (http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?t=53178) that the devs should put more priority in keeping the current arsenal fresh with more customization options vs almost solely focusing on new toys.

[Baneblade]

Why make new posts about something that is already discussed? If someone else already started a discussion about the need for more weapon customization and Blacklight Retribution being the reference, there's really no need to hijack it and start a similar one 10 minutes after it. That's just bad forum etiquette and I'm kinda disappointed Hamma allows this actually.

Anyway, if we can agree that a BL:R system is nice but not likely going to happen, let's go back to my original suggestion (http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?t=53178) that the devs should put more priority in keeping the current arsenal fresh with more customization options vs almost solely focusing on new toys.

Why are you so convinced you had anything to do with this thread?

[Rolfski]

Why are you so convinced you had anything to do with this thread?
You said it yourself, didn't you? It really doesn't matter if people independently have similar ideas. If there's a topic already about it, no need to start one of your own, that's just forum overload.

[Varsam]

First of all, it is easier to nickel and dime people when you are actually nickel and diming them, not asking them to shell out larger sums of money.

It is also important to keep everything available via certs. Not to mention giving people more options means they spend more money. None of that gimmicky rent business either.

With that business model, how do you expect them to make money if you take away their most lucrative payment option (temporary ownership)? If players get to own attachments forever, AND have the option to use free in-game currency to do so, SOE would need to either make each attachment ridiculously expensive, or keep pumping out attachments on a regular basis, which would quickly lead to many redundant items, and we'd be at square one.

All SOE has to do to make it more of an SC sink is to have more tiers of attachments (adv laser, adv grip, etc). Plus they could let you swap scopes on the fly or switch from the compensator to the suppressor.

Adding more tiers of increasingly effective attachments available for purchase makes the game more pay to win, which runs contrary to what PS2 is about.

[almalino]

I hate many guns. I just got lost in them. Current arsenal is already more then enough. Gives us upgrades and that would be enough.

[Blynd]

Tbh the issue with the guns is that with every new gun the old ones seem to be down tuned. I got the serpent which was really good the smg came out had a go of that it was ok but at the same time the serpent seemed to be tking more rounds to kill with. So my issue with it is that to stop the power creep they have to make the old weapons rubbish to force people to buy the new ones and thus force people to spend money on SC which is wrong.

[Baneblade]

You said it yourself, didn't you? It really doesn't matter if people independently have similar ideas. If there's a topic already about it, no need to start one of your own, that's just forum overload.

I didn't know your thread existed, I guess I didn't make that clear enough for you. Sorry if you got a forum rash out of it.

With that business model, how do you expect them to make money if you take away their most lucrative payment option (temporary ownership)? If players get to own attachments forever, AND have the option to use free in-game currency to do so, SOE would need to either make each attachment ridiculously expensive, or keep pumping out attachments on a regular basis, which would quickly lead to many redundant items, and we'd be at square one.

First of all, people are more likely to spend money when it comes across as optional. If the only way to get new guns was SC, do you think this game would be anywhere near stable population wise?

Other games have proven that you don't need to make things overpriced to make it profitable.

Adding more tiers of increasingly effective attachments available for purchase makes the game more pay to win, which runs contrary to what PS2 is about.

Not if the same upgrades are available for certs. All SC does and should do is buy convenience. Getting something faster than someone else is convenient, not pay to win.

[Sturmhardt]

It doesn't really matter if they introduce new/op weapons or upgrades/attachments. Same shit, different label.

.sent via phone.

[HiroshiChugi]

It doesn't really matter if they introduce new/op weapons or upgrades/attachments. Same shit, different label.

.sent via phone.

Agreed.

[Koadster]

I guess they still can bring in all the PS1 weapons. They could make a Faction and common pool varient on each so I guess they will keep pumping out weapons for a while. But I do see in the future they will run out of weapons to make for existing weapon categories.. How much more variation can you get for the Carbines/LMGs/Snipers/ARs that arent already covered by the former.

[Figment]

Why are you so convinced you had anything to do with this thread?

Indeed, clearly this thread is about my love of pies, not guns. :cool:

[Rolfski]

I didn't know your thread existed, I guess I didn't make that clear enough for you. Sorry if you got a forum rash out of it. Forget about it then and too bad for the redundant postings about the same idea. At least we both agree that devs should focus more on customization of the current arsenal vs new weapons, although your ideas are a bit more drastic than mine.

[maradine]

Indeed, clearly this thread is about my love of pies, not guns. :cool:

I'd think it would be about love of stroopwafels. When they're stale and sharpened, they're a considerable weapon.

[Mietz]

Indeed, clearly this thread is about my love of pies, not guns. :cool:

We all know you hate guns Figment.

[Ruffdog]

Not if the same upgrades are available for certs. All SC does and should do is buy convenience. Getting something faster than someone else is convenient, not pay to win.

Currently you can use cash to skip the grind when opting for sidegrades. But if you wanted to allow out and out better components to be available for cash, so "advanced laser" over "laser" then unless the former comes with a disadvantage over the latter then it is absolutely pay to win.

I like your components ideas though.

[Lonehunter]

I like the idea, but if you're selling these drastic weapon attachments in the store that vary by class (like long barrel for snipers, drum for HA), then the ending effect really doesn't seem much different then the current implementation.

It really just seems like an alternative approach to the same overall affect, not different enough.

Are you basically saying, "With weapons, I want less options to choose from, and more impact with chosen modifications"?

[Mietz]

Currently you can use cash to skip the grind when opting for sidegrades. But if you wanted to allow out and out better components to be available for cash, so "advanced laser" over "laser" then unless the former comes with a disadvantage over the latter then it is absolutely pay to win.

I like your components ideas though.

It comes down to balancing, in BR the components all have strengths and weaknesses.

So an "advanced laser" would be better in the sense that it would provide double the benefit for example, but also double the draw-back.

i.e.High velocity ammo would give more damage but make recoil stronger, so advanced HVA would give even more damage but even more recoil. etc.
Its fine if someone takes advanced HVA immediately since the drawback is still there.

It would lead to true specialization.

[Rahabib]

...Anyway, going all Blacklight Retribution style and building your own gun from parts would certainly be nice but probably a too drastic change in the game. I guess I could settle for a system as I suggested (http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?t=53178).

I like this idea and I think it would be a neat system for the game but honestly I don't see it happening it would require some pretty hefty changes.

I agree with these comments, it too drastic a change to ever be implemented, no matter how good an idea it is. Its like all the threads about lattice - IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN.

Not really, just let weapon parts be bought with SC or certs. They get more money out of it then they do with the current model in all likelihood.

Its not about the difficulty, its about a dramatic change in the way the game is monetized. To do something like this, you would have to refund all the money and certs spent on weapons and then probably even refund certs for certain attachments. Its basically asking to start all over. The average Joe would log in one day and be greeted with everything gone.

Again, not a bad idea, but its not going to happen.

[Sifer2]

Currently SOE has replaced the monthly fee with selling monthly toys to the 10% who buy stuff. The problem with your suggestion is it is probably even harder to come up with new unique balanced attachments each month.

What the game really needs is a business model that separates the profit from the game balance. I think the Guild Wars model of just selling the game would have been better really. That is pay 50 dollars, and unlock all weapons. Can still buy cosmetics/boosters. Only problem is then I fear SOE would just start adding unbalanced new tiers of class abilities that cost huge amounts of certs to drive up booster sales.

[Neutral Calypso]

You should note that, seeing as the game is outside of the Beta stages, your suggestions are far too drastic a change from the game design. (Losing all the rad guns we already bought? Inconceivable!)

I, for one, prefer not to make suggestions that I know will never happen in the game. Nevertheless I suppose it is fun to consider what might have been...

[krnasaur]

This would be great for everyone but SOE - your plan is difficult to monetize. No money, no planetside.

blacklight does well ontop of being an amazing game

[Figment]

We all know you hate guns Figment.

Guns schmunz. Let's talk about my apple pie already. It's warm, covered in crumbs, has whipped cream on it, is filled to the brim with apples and can never used to kill another person.

[Varsam]

Not if the same upgrades are available for certs. All SC does and should do is buy convenience. Getting something faster than someone else is convenient, not pay to win.

Didn't think about it that way. You've sold me on that.

First of all, people are more likely to spend money when it comes across as optional. If the only way to get new guns was SC, do you think this game would be anywhere near stable population wise?

Other games have proven that you don't need to make things overpriced to make it profitable.

Still disagree with you on this point, to an extent. (Keep in mind this is all pure opinion, I know nothing about marketing and consumer behavior) I agree that people buy when they feel it's optional, but the only truly optional items are cosmetics. For items with impact on gameplay, there is a perceived notion that not having certain items means being disadvantaged. It makes players feel compelled by outside motivators, which they naturally resist.

[BlaxicanX]

Guns schmunz. Let's talk about my apple pie already. It's warm, covered in crumbs, has whipped cream on it, is filled to the brim with apples and can never used to kill another person.

Nope.

Diabetes.

[Rahabib]

blacklight does well ontop of being an amazing game

Its also not about just making money at it, its about pissing off people who have already invested into the current system. its like buying super mario and then all of the sudden the developers wipe it out and give you Sonic the Hedgehog - both fun games, but its so dramatic a change that many will be left to say "I thought I paid for Super Mario." OK thats a horrible analogy, but you get what I am saying. Yes, the idea is good, yes it would even make money, but its so far removed from the path that SOE has gone down, it will never ever ever ever never ever happen. ever.

[Dougnifico]

Why not combine ideas? Have that level of customization with multiple weapon platforms. Each platform would have some kind of base value. An SMG platform would be good at CQC and SMG stuff, but you can completely rig it to be a medium range weapon with lower count mags, higher power rounds, and a heavy barrel. You can make it into a Mini-Saw with a massive mag, foregrip, and other crap so it annihilates at close range while kicking like a dying mule. At heart though, it will still be an SMG and won't ever be an effective sniper rifle.

[Rahabib]

Why not combine ideas? Have that level of customization with multiple weapon platforms. Each platform would have some kind of base value. An SMG platform would be good at CQC and SMG stuff, but you can completely rig it to be a medium range weapon with lower count mags, higher power rounds, and a heavy barrel. You can make it into a Mini-Saw with a massive mag, foregrip, and other crap so it annihilates at close range while kicking like a dying mule. At heart though, it will still be an SMG and won't ever be an effective sniper rifle.

isnt that essentially what they are doing now? different ammo types, laser sights, etc.? The expensive weapons you can already put pretty much any kind of attachment you want.

[Chaff]

.
Sadly, I have more faith Sony will do what's be$t for the ca$h shop vs what's best for gameplay. If players keep buying new "stuff"....we'll keep gettting more sh1t ... that "looks" & perhpas feels a bit new in some way....
.

[Baneblade]

Id wager few PS2 players have spent as much SC in PS2 as I have. Yet I'd give up all my unlocks to have a more indepth weapon system.

That said, each weapon could simply be refunded, to free up that SC to be used in the new system.

[MrBloodworth]

I like Blacklight, but not enough to rip off their weapons system verbatim.

edit: sorry, "borrow".

I think one of the best aspects of Blacklight is the treatment of doors and the hacking system they employ on them and control points.

[Dougnifico]

isnt that essentially what they are doing now? different ammo types, laser sights, etc.? The expensive weapons you can already put pretty much any kind of attachment you want.

I'm saying to take it a step further and add more depth and effect to weapon customization. Make it so you can fundamentally change a weapon with many weapons to start from scratch with.

[Varsam]

I'm saying to take it a step further and add more depth and effect to weapon customization. Make it so you can fundamentally change a weapon with many weapons to start from scratch with.

A problem with that is that enabling that level of customization leads to lots of redundancies in performance/role. Which is not bad per se, but then discourages spending on multiple platforms.