Mines

Discussion in 'Feedback' started by zenarion, Apr 6, 2009.

  1. zenarion

    zenarion Member

    Messages:
    953
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That's what I'm saying, while trying to counter SIP's point.
    A weapon isn't overpowered if it does what it's designed to do.
    How the hell are then Anti-Personnell or Anti-Armour mines overpowered? I don't think they are.
    Dawgas, a tip: if you want to gain points easy, play rifleman with HMG and accuracy upgrade.
     
  2. Jonat

    Jonat Member

    Messages:
    219
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    that is until people realise there's gonna be a HMG around the same corner and start countering.
     
  3. Jimather

    Jimather Member

    Messages:
    495
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So if the devs took some drugs and designed and implemented a massive nuke system for the jeep that kills everything on the map in one go, that wouldn't be overpowered cos its doing what it is designed to do ?
     
  4. Jonat

    Jonat Member

    Messages:
    219
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    They'd need to take drugs to do that?

    "designed to do" within a balanced result. Are HMGs invulerable? No. They're fairly easy to counter given the chance. I'm not even gonna comment about such an absurd extreme example.

    Are engineers OP because they can build stuff quicker than other classes?
     
  5. Jimather

    Jimather Member

    Messages:
    495
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Even then just because they are doing what they are designed to do within a balanced result doesnt mean they are actually HAVING a balanced result.

    I dont agree or disagree with the concept, i disagree with the logic that if something is designed to do X, it must be achieving X.
     
  6. Jonat

    Jonat Member

    Messages:
    219
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Okay, if we think of it this way;

    What is it designed to do? Kill infantry, kill infantry good.
    How is it limited? drains stamina when fired, lack of Stamina causes worse shots, large arc of fire (spray), only really good prone, long reload time.
    What are the counters? grenades (cause he cant move quickly), better accuracy at distance guns, MG turrets and vehicles.

    Is that a reasonable way of determining balance?
     
  7. Jimather

    Jimather Member

    Messages:
    495
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Reasonable yes, but balancing is more of an art than science.

    In the scientific view,the best way to determine balance is with statistical averages, but the data you would need to collect and analyse for every little thing in a complex, intelligently controlled computer game right down to individual weapons v weapons in any situation would require half a games worth of coding and a lot of people a long time to actually sift through.

    I know there is a stat collecting system in place but it only focuses on a relatively small number of things, does it really collect the info for every time where x weapon faces y weapon in situation z, i doubt it. Its better than nothing of course i know but its still only a rough guide and still wont tell exactly why in all cases something is statistically unbalanced and where the adjustments actually need to be made.

    And where exactly are the middle of the scales anyway ? What are you trying to achieve ? Who gets to decide what you are trying to achieve ?

    So determining balance of a game is something that really, comes down to the choice of a designer and if they are lucky, player communities. What could seem unbalanced to one set of players might seem fine to another because their gaming likes, wants and habits are different.

    So determining balance is really a personal thing and reducing it to a formula or linear logical connections does not work. Noone can create a formula to say how to paint a timeless masterpiece, not everyone even agrees on what a timeless masterpiece actually is.

    You just have to step back and say, does this feel right, do most people agree, do some relevant stats support this, are there any players left, are we still having fun in both winning and losing (most of the time), insert own question important to your aims and wants here.

    Sorry for writing a bit of an essay on this, but sometimes thats whats needed.
     
  8. zenarion

    zenarion Member

    Messages:
    953
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So how are anti-tank mines that are not set off by infantry bad? I like the thought of having my mines kill things that matter, not some unlucky engineer.
     
  9. -Mayama-

    -Mayama- MANLY MAN BITCH

    Messages:
    6,487
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Imo I dont think anti infantry mines are overpowered or unbalanced cause almost every time I die cause I stepped on a mine i thought "Own fault"
     
  10. Jimather

    Jimather Member

    Messages:
    495
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Im not sure if thats actually in direct response to my last post in this thread but if it is then...

    The actual idea of the thread is absolutely irrelevant to me, im just arguing with the logic being used to test the concept.
     
  11. zenarion

    zenarion Member

    Messages:
    953
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So you are basicly trolling?
     
  12. Morcam

    Morcam Member

    Messages:
    89
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Jonas, I'm not entirely sure you're understanding what he's trying to say. The point, as I understand it, is that certain items are effective in certain circumstances. The HMG is incredible at mowing down infantry, at any range. However, you are limited to a stationary, prone position. In closed in areas, this is a disadvantage. However, in many circumstances, such as escort, you can cut down 25 people in a row easily without ever being shot. The problem there isn't that the weapon doesn't have counters, it's that there is not a practical situation to use them.

    With that said, I very much approve of splitting mines into anti infantry and anti vehicle. As far as vehicles, the same damage as of now or slightly more is just fine. For anti-infantry, I would prefer them to not be an instakill, more along the lines of 50-75% damage. Radius would be great to help balance that out. I also like the idea of infantry not setting off AT mines. It would help on some infantry only maps.

    Also, what if you could stack anti-tank mines, but not anti-infantry? Then, you wouldn't have the problem of being able to stack a ton of AI mines in a doorway, and instakilling anyone who comes through. However, you can still have a focused cluster of AT mines (if you like). No mines set off other mines, although that really wouldn't be a problem since you couldn't stack AI mines in the first place.
     
  13. Bishop Gantry

    Bishop Gantry Member

    Messages:
    245
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Goodie infantry simply runs trough every minefield, no need for defusal when you are the defusal, nothing like taking a stroll trough 2 minefields and then getting instant revived by a friendly engie...
     
  14. Morcam

    Morcam Member

    Messages:
    89
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think you were trying to say something here. I don't know what it is.

    If you mean that AV mines don't blow up infantry, okay? You gave that up as soon as they got extra damage, and got the AI mines.

    If you mean AI mines don't instakill infantry, you got a large splash and still large amounts of damage.

    If you mean revive, go make a thread about how much you hate it.
     

Share This Page