Creativity and Game Balance - Page 2

Hexen · 2003-11-27, 10:38 PM

Sif. What about all those energy weapons?

Rayder · 2003-11-27, 10:40 PM

I don't see how those came from the Vanu. We have energy based weapons today. I don't see why an advanced society that branched out of the TR wouldn't have them either, and they aren't that great.

Flammey · 2003-11-27, 11:48 PM

I think there should be more uniqueness towards each empire. More unique weapons and vehicles, not less. Besides, this hover uniqueness is now lost. Anyone can get a hover vehicle now, and drive in Rexo armor. Personally, I'd rather gun a Magrider than a Lightning or Vanguard. The Direct fire of the Rail gun is extremely effective against Air. More so than the 150 or even 100mm cannon. Chainguns are direct fire, but I can take out a Mosq or Reav with less ammo, and in less time than with a chaingun

Rbstr · 2003-11-28, 12:07 AM

yeah but the hover vehicles are not realy the kind you can bring into combat, the Flail ned to lag behind a bit, and the switchy can only be used effectively from a stand still. that liek saying the NC are ruined because of the sweeper, or the TR are ruined becuase of the switchies deployability

Hexen · 2003-11-28, 12:35 AM

The energy weapons are still Vanu..

Hover and energy weapons are what define the VS, because thats what they obviously took from Vanu technology. None of the other sides use energy weapons, so I figured it was a very safe assumption.

Its not like the TR and NC aren't using energy weapons just because they think they suck.

BadAsh · 2003-11-28, 01:00 AM

I respect your opinions, but as I see it the game has serious balance problems. By exploiting an Empires weakness or capitalizing on one of your strengths a single soldier can cause havoc on an enemy platoon. Knowing you have a huge advantage at close range, you can pick your battlefield with very little planning. Then you just obliterate all opposition until either you get bored or they quit. Not too challenging if you ask me. But, again, I�m the competitive type. My thrill is in the good and fair fight. If I win I want to be able to say I defeated my opponent. If I lose I want to know I gave him/her a run for the money and but up a good fight. Too often, I�m thinking they had no chance, or I had no chance against such odds.

Some Empires have painfully simple strategies to achieve significant advantage while others struggle under similar circumstances to achieve a hard fought loss. To me this gets old very quickly.

It�s simple because strengths and weaknesses are diametrically opposed in this game. The worst match up is NC vs. the VS. The NC are slower more heavily armored and harder hitting. The VS are faster and much lightly armored and hitting. The NC just move into a base and take it. It does not get simpler than that. What are the VS to do? Use their movement to run away faster? If they hold their ground they are dead in a big way. At best the VS are a harassment force picking off NC stragglers.

VS MAXs don�t do well in close quarters. NC MAXs do. So just bring the fight to them and force them to defend their base or force them to run away.

VS Magriders don�t stand a chance against NC Vanguards. The best they can do it use �hit and run� tactics. In which case the NC would get worn down and picked apart. But what do they do when the NC just roll into their base? Again, you have to choice of getting obliterated or just running away and letting them have it.

This is why I�ve found the TR to be the most fun to play. They are kind of the middle ground. The VS are the best �back hackers� the NC are the best �frontal assault� and the TR are in between them. They are good at both, but masters of neither like the NC and VS.

Anyway, I think you see my point here. I just want things even and fair. And currently they are not. Hence you have many disatisfaction posts complaining about this weapon or that vehicle, etc. This causes players to leave. Even go in the caves and say "Hi"? The only sound is your echo saying "HI" back.

BadAsh

Rayder · 2003-11-28, 01:07 AM

No. This is a war game, in war the only fair thing is that your kicking the other guys asses. You cannot tell the outcome of a battle based soley on the empire's style, it also depends on the number of people, the skill of those people, what is being used, and where. If the NC are invading the home continent of the VS, and they have to drag Vanguards through the WG, how are the going to overrun the VS who have Technology Plants and Amp Stations and Bio Labs right there? Your assumption of a battle based purely on the fighters is idiotic, and weak.

Hexen · 2003-11-28, 01:59 AM

This is ridiculous... It's called TACTICS.

An enemy always has strengths and weaknesses, the key to victory is knowing how to use those weaknesses to your advantage. This works on basically all scales of war, and is the whole basis of the concept of mixed arms.

A soldier with a rifle walks up to a tank. The tank has a strength against the soldier, the soldier dies. The soldier's friend walks up with an RPG, a weapon made to exploit a weakness in a tank's design. The tank is destroyed.

Thus is the way of war.

If you want fair fighting, you have to submit yourself to duels with rules, ensuring exactly even odds.

If PS was to be completely balanced with nobody having any more of a chance than anyone else. There would be no vehicles, one weapon and one armour-type.

Jagd · 2003-11-28, 02:31 AM

This excercise might help you understand, BadAsh. Go to Emerald and create an NC character. VR your way to BR3, and select Medium & Heavy Assault. Solo your way to BR6, and then come talk to us about how easy it is to crush whole platoons of Vanu with the supernaturally overpowered and unfair NC weapons.

Flammey · 2003-11-28, 02:46 AM

Which is why I pick up Jackhammers, Cycler, and Gauss. After using Vanu weaponry for a while, one can really kick ass with nme weaponry. At least with the Lasher you have to learn to aim better. Not that you don't with the MCG or JH. Just that you have to learn how the globs of energy move, how fast the reach your target, how much you have to lead. With the JH you don't have to lead with your weapon at all. Just point it right at your opponent and pull the trigger. I still say a good Vanu player is a better gamer all round. Anyone can pick up a Sweeper or a JH and do well with it. Anyone can hop into a Dual Cycler and do well. The thing people must learn is not when to fire, but when NOT to fire. That makes a good player. Sure you get more kills if you just fire all the time. But your grief will be that much higher. This game would be way different if instead of grief, they took away experiance for your TK. It would make you that much more careful now wouldn't it? Accidents do happen, yes, but most accidents can be avoided.

Rayder · 2003-11-28, 02:55 AM

Actually, IMO DC is the hardest MAX to use, having shit damage against infantry, not exactly the strongest damage against vehicles (each shot is really sad), not being too accurate, ok rof, but still annoying.

BadAsh · 2003-11-28, 02:58 AM

Originally Posted by Jagd

This excercise might help you understand, BadAsh. Go to Emerald and create an NC character. VR your way to BR3, and select Medium & Heavy Assault. Solo your way to BR6, and then come talk to us about how easy it is to crush whole platoons of Vanu with the supernaturally overpowered and unfair NC weapons.

Done. Already did this on Markov. 11+ VS attacked a base held only by me. When the butchery was over, 3 parked purple reavers, 2 parked Magriders and an AMS was all that was left. I suppose they could have kept comming, but after about 35+ straight kills they moved on... Though the last 6 or so kills were after I found their AMS and I camped it...

What aided me though was that a CE placed motion sensors in good locations and the VS failed to do a few primary things...

1. Stay in groups
2. Take out the motion sensors

Oh, and how did I know it was 11 guys? Because the hate tell I got after told me so... LOL.

Further, to what others have said, I hear ya. I'm not saying that my opinion is better or anything. I just brought it up for discussion. Agree? Disagree? Have other cool ideas? All fine by me

To me that's the point of posting and sharing thoughts and ideas.

Also my VS against NC comparison was assuming all things equal... of course if the VS have greater numbers OR are definding a home continent then it's easier for them... but assume 30 players each... same tech resourses... The NC have the edge as long as they force the VS into close quarters...

Anyway, this whole post was just food for thought... so the next time you hear a balance complaint... and I'm sure you will... think of how else this might have been solved?

BadAsh

Veteran · 2003-11-28, 02:58 AM

Dual-Cycler on the same table as Jackhammer? The DC is a passable MAX, but hardly an ownage machine. If you're not anchored, you're not going to kill infantry very quickly at all, and if you are, it's time for the Decimator burrito.

Flammey · 2003-11-28, 03:03 AM

Then I guess I'm a better player. I hopped into one and got lots of kills. But then, after using a Quasar, DC is a breeze.

BadAsh · 2003-11-28, 03:13 AM

Originally Posted by Hexen

This is ridiculous... It's called TACTICS.

An enemy always has strengths and weaknesses, the key to victory is knowing how to use those weaknesses to your advantage. This works on basically all scales of war, and is the whole basis of the concept of mixed arms.

A soldier with a rifle walks up to a tank. The tank has a strength against the soldier, the soldier dies. The soldier's friend walks up with an RPG, a weapon made to exploit a weakness in a tank's design. The tank is destroyed.

Thus is the way of war.

If you want fair fighting, you have to submit yourself to duels with rules, ensuring exactly even odds.

If PS was to be completely balanced with nobody having any more of a chance than anyone else. There would be no vehicles, one weapon and one armour-type.

Good point. But consider that my thoughts were infantry vs. infantry and vehicle vs vehicle balance based...

Say that one team has the advantage at close range, one at medium, and one at long... If I were the short ranged trooper, I'd stay inside and defend, making them come to me... and then...

But what if the other team realized this and could adjust their stratagy? Oh, they have a group of short range weapons troops... let's change gear to match them... That's the kind of tactics I'm talking about... but currently in PS you can't do this...

The solution? Zerg or get pushed out.

So imagine that each empire had a short, medium, and long ranges effective weapon... then equipment selection and preparation (read: tactics) would determine the winner... And that's the whole point of my post

BadAsh

FIN