Factional Weapons Cause Faction Pop Imbalance? - Page 4

Sirisian · 2012-06-24, 10:00 PM

Originally Posted by Pyreal

Will Factional differences lead to pigeonholing of play styles and imbalanced factional populations?

Probably. In order to try to solve this they are allowing customization to essentially "sidegrade" any weapon into the other factions to make up for situational advantages.

Personally I said this like a year ago that their whole design is a bit flawed for allowing balance. We had this problem in PS1 where the developers and designers were fixated on creating RTS type balance. However, RTS balance assumes multiple class of units fighting together to even out differences in the system without respect toward any 1v1 balance, which is an admirable system. I don't believe the game needs to be balanced 1v1 across classes. However, we have a problem when the same class for different factions are so asymmetric for situations. Also using the customization system with certs so that players can match another faction's class is kind of awkward. Especially when one faction might have a situational advantage that is far more common.

Also I'm not sure if we'll see it in PS2, but we had suppressive fire in PS1 with the CoF system that favored fast firing weapons. That is someone getting shot once would have their CoF spike a little bit. Luckily it didn't come up much, but if the fire rates are too disproportionate then we might start seeing problems with spray based weapons.

My ideal system, as much as some other vets would hate it, would honestly just be to scrap all the situational weapon balance across factions and make each faction a reskin of the NS to ensure players are choosing their faction based on lore and not a playstyle. The concept that somehow each faction is missing out on 2/3rds of the playstyles is sure to cause imbalance issues in the future. We saw this in PS1 with the heavy weapons which were impossible to balance because they were specifically designed to be balanced situationally. For anyone that hasn't played PS1 this meant the NC were amazing at defending and camping, TR were amazing at medium to close range (which made them good at mossy dropping), and VS were good at spamming (so good in fact doorways could be blocked with orbs).

Needless to say if every faction was balanced such that every paired weapon across factions was identical except for skins (on the weapon and projectiles), including HA by converting them to a MCG variant, we'd see a huge balance in gameplay. One that would allow the cert system to be utilized such that everyone could move into different playstyles without getting stuck with a default one.

The chance of seeing this kind of balance? None. We probably have years worth of patches to balance weapons, or developers that hope people won't realize the problems because of how complex the battles are. Or they think that if someone feels unbalanced in a situation they'll work toward getting certs to balance their weapon with the other faction's weapon.

Right now the developers have made some key changes that will help with overall balance. Giving the burster flak MAX weapons to all the factions was one of the best starts seeing as that was one of the most situationally advantageous weapons in PS1. If they can extrapolate that with all the weapons we'd be in good shape.

edit, was just talking someone in IRC about this. Some of the situational inbalance totally changed how much people enjoyed battles. As a VS bridge battles on Esamir and outdoor battles on Ishundar are some of my most memorable because of the lancer and sniper combo. Other factions have totally different viewpoints on what was fun. If we could allow all factions to access to every playstyle you'd see some very varied soldiers in such a way that the game would be enjoyable for everyone in every situation.

edit, I wonder if the weapon customization to mimic other weapons is to replace the weapon looting. Kind of odd switch really.

kaffis · 2012-06-25, 01:08 AM

There are a couple ways to approach this:

Factions will favor certain playstyles and situations. Asymmetric balance kind of makes this obvious.

The point of asymmetric balance, though, is that the overall result is balanced.

If you're NC, you learn to burst fire or die, and you stay away from long-range shootouts. If you're TR, you learn to maneuver for close range engagements and lay on the trigger for sustained DPS. If you're VS, you learn to favor longer ranges to press your accuracy advantage.

Conversely, for people who come into the game with stronger playstyle preferences than faction preferences, they'll gravitate towards the playstyle they enjoy most.

So, I guess the answer to your second question, "Will Factional differences lead to pigeonholing of play styles and imbalanced factional populations?" is -- "Yes, but I wouldn't use 'pigeonholing' since it's loaded language, and there's no evidence that favored playstyles will necessarily yield imbalanced populations, as playstyle IS an individual preference with a broad range over a large population."

Moving onto your second question, "Will my personal skill make the difference in winning a 1v1 encounter, or will the factional trade-offs of the counterpart weapons be the deciding factor?"

The answer is simple: "Personal skill will win UNLESS you consistently insist on taking your ES weapons into situations in which they're heavily disadvantaged."

I could make a comment here about knowing how to be effective with your weaponry (instead of deluded thinking about how you WISH you could be effective with a given weapon) being the hallmark of "personal skill," but that seems a bit harsh. I do have to admit, though, that this entire thread seems to be a bit "Wah, the fluffy theme I like doesn't match up with the weapon feel I'd prefer" -- and to that, well, you can't please everybody, and I'm sorry you fall into the segment of the population that has to choose between theme and feel, but somebody has to.

Yago · 2012-06-25, 06:08 AM

Old players will likely choose the same empire .
New players choose for lots of reasons , some like scifi :vanu , some like the "power" NC , some like the colour red TR(Rus & China) .....
Many strange reasons IDK .

Not something I would worry about at all .

RSphil · 2012-06-25, 07:34 AM

as far as iv read and seen all the weapons across the factions do the same amount of damage but in different ways. so it all comes down to how you play. fast firing but low damage or slow firing and high damage ect.

im going NC cus i like the look of the faction and other stuff. how the weapons handle i will see in beta but it wont really bother me as i can adapt. i will play the other factions but NC will be my main.

i think they have weapon balance sorted, as people have said they never really had any problems in the first planetside so i dont think they will cock it up in the second.

Mongo · 2012-06-25, 08:50 AM

Different weapons are fine, suited for different playstyles. There wasnt ever any super weapon that a side had that won in all situations. Like a Jackhammer usually wins up close and a Lasher at a further distance.

It also gives you something else to cement your hatred for the other factions.

No Skilll Jack Hammer NUBS!
Chain Gun Spamming Retards!

Lasher is fine though ^^

Or as that old saying goes:

Scissors: Nerf Rock, Paper is fine.

Stew · 2012-06-25, 08:54 AM

Originally Posted by Pyreal

There are Two Main questions that are underlined.

Vanu Sovereignty Weapons:
Accuracy: High
Recoil: High (Burst and Sustained)
ROF: Low
DPShot: Medium

Terran Republic Weapons:
Accuracy: Medium
Recoil: Medium (High burst, Low sustained)
ROF: High
DPShot: Low

New Conglomerate Weapons:
Accuracy: Medium (High burst, Low sustained)
Recoil:Medium (Low burst, High sustained)
ROF: Low
DPShot: High

There will be numerous trade-offs for Vehicles as well.

Look at the NC: High accuracy, low initial recoil and high damage. Its the Holy Grail for players who like to aim for the head!
If a player wants to be a Sniper or focus on CQC, will he be labeled a scrub because they aren't playing the side that offers the factional weapon bonuses most well suited to the task?

Will my personal skill make the difference in winning a 1v1 encounter, or will the factional trade-offs of the counterpart weapons be the deciding factor?

If I am quicker and more accurate than my opponent, but I die because of a difference in counterpart weapons, I don't see how I won't be pissed off.

I am not a proponent of homogenization (particularly in RPGs), but I don't see how faction based mechanical differences in weapons will work in a modern styled MMOFPS.

I've played a few FPS and one thing that is always formost in players minds is fairness and balance in weapons. You can't give one side a weapon that is situationally better and not have the other side in an uproar.

PS1 vets will likely expect factional weapon differences, however, your average FPS player will expect a level playing field as regards weapons.

I can't seem to realized the piece of the puzzle that I'm sure I am missing, it must be there because there are a lot of intelligent people Developing this game who know a lot more than I do...

So saying that, help me solve this dilemma...

Will Factional differences lead to pigeonholing of play styles and imbalanced factional populations?

TL;DR= Factional weapon differences will cause players to (QQ) gravitate to factions based on weapon performance.

The ROF of the vanu is not corect on this OP

the vanu rate of fire is Beetween low and medium Its a Medium Low rate of fire not LOW

the Pc MAG graphics show it perfectly

the most important thing is the DPS Damage Per second ! not damage per shot if a wepon make like 10 % damage on each shot but shot 10 bullet in 2 sec so it will be equal as a weapon who make 20 % but have a rate of fire of 5 bullet in 2 sec

damage per shot means nothing exept thats better aiming is required in less damage pershot since every bullet count and the magazine are smallers each shot you miss its a 20 % damage loss

outsider · 2012-06-25, 08:35 PM

nah weapons don't determine population sizes because most of the time you will be carrying the wrong weapon to deal with the problem that kills you anyway.

you got a shotgun the reaver pilot kills you with a missile. you got anti vehicle the infiltrator stabs you to death. you got a sniper rifle and a max lands on your face.

population sizes will be determined by the actions of smaller groups within that empire managing to meet their objectives, as more people tend to stay on longer when their side is winning, over time increasing that empires population on the map.

Talking about weapon selection, these smaller groups will all be carrying alot of different weapons so at least a couple of them will always have the right weapon to overcome whatever obstacle they are facing.

If you are concerned about pigeonholing playstyles, that won't be a result of the weapons at your empires disposal but the class you are playing.