30 replies to this topic

[Conquistador]

Roundlay, on November 27 2012 - 11:44 AM, said:

AsianJoyKiller, on November 27 2012 - 11:32 AM, said:

Hiding weapon variety behind a grind is cheesy and bad progression.

Would it not follow that hiding cosmetic variety behind a grind is also "cheesy and bad progression"_

not if it's cosmetic. You don't have to balance for cosmetic changes. You do for weapons because they make or break the game.

[AsianJoyKiller]

Roundlay, on November 27 2012 - 11:44 AM, said:

AsianJoyKiller, on November 27 2012 - 11:32 AM, said:

Hiding weapon variety behind a grind is cheesy and bad progression.

Would it not follow that hiding cosmetic variety behind a grind is also "cheesy and bad progression"_

Cosmetics add no real variety to gameplay.

[Conquistador]

AsianJoyKiller, on November 27 2012 - 11:49 AM, said:

Roundlay, on November 27 2012 - 11:44 AM, said:

AsianJoyKiller, on November 27 2012 - 11:32 AM, said:

Hiding weapon variety behind a grind is cheesy and bad progression.

Would it not follow that hiding cosmetic variety behind a grind is also "cheesy and bad progression"_

Cosmetics add no real variety to gameplay.

Agreed. Giving players additional utility just because they've spent three days straight in a mech is a great way to drive off new players.

[Sylhiri]

Conquistador, on November 27 2012 - 11:50 AM, said:

Agreed. Giving players additional utility just because they've spent three days straight in a mech is a great way to drive off new players.

I'm on the fence about that. While it would make things tremendously easier to balance mechs out, if you wanted a to use a new weapon you would have to use a different mech. I kind of like the idea of using one weapon for one map and another weapon for a different map while still being able to use the ability of my favorite mech, but I guess they would make more money by locking down certain guns to certain mechs.

[Roundlay]

Conquistador, on November 27 2012 - 11:50 AM, said:

Agreed. Giving players additional utility just because they've spent three days straight in a mech is a great way to drive off new players.

I don't like the use of the word utility here as I think it overplays how differences in weapons work in relation to other players whilst on grid, but I'll go with it for the sake of discussion. I'm not sure how someone that has played for three days straight being rewarded some unique weapon for their time correlates to new players being driven away. What makes this more plausible than the alternative: giving players who've spent three days straight in a mech an additional utility draws other players in_

Conquistador, on November 27 2012 - 11:49 AM, said:

not if it's cosmetic. You don't have to balance for cosmetic changes. You do for weapons because they make or break the game.

True, you don't have to balance for cosmetic changes. Your latter point seems to be entirely dependent on the idea that Adhesive couldn't balance additional weapons, though. I'm not sure why weapons should be excluded as unlockables simply because they're difficult to balance or because they have to function in an ecosystem.

AsianJoyKiller, on November 27 2012 - 11:49 AM, said:

Cosmetics add no real variety to gameplay.

As long as an unlock adds no new functionality or variety to gameplay it is necessarily better than balanced, exclusive weaponry_

Edited by Roundlay, November 27 2012 - 12:11 PM.

[AsianJoyKiller]

Roundlay, on November 27 2012 - 12:10 PM, said:

As long as an unlock adds no new functionality or variety to gameplay it is necessarily better than balanced, exclusive weaponry_

Correct.
It no longer becomes vertical progression.

[Roundlay]

AsianJoyKiller, on November 27 2012 - 12:27 PM, said:

Correct. It no longer becomes vertical progression.

I agree that vertical progression is detrimental in more ways than it is beneficial, but if you're going to couch the discussion in a vacuum in which weapons are balanced, I don't see how it follows that balanced weapon unlocks are not a form of horizontal progression. If I reach the level cap and unlock a weapon that is no better or worse than any other weapon, balanced in other words, I've been afforded variety and not an advantage.

[The_Silencer]

I'm gonna be straight on this: Level 20 players should not get the ultimate weapon in the battlefield due to their game progressions. Just to make myself clear on this.

Although.. well.. I've already suggested on which bonus as possibilities would be pretty fair IMHO 1 page ago.

[AsianJoyKiller]

Roundlay, on November 27 2012 - 12:40 PM, said:

AsianJoyKiller, on November 27 2012 - 12:27 PM, said:

Correct. It no longer becomes vertical progression.

I agree that vertical progression is detrimental in more ways than it is beneficial, but if you're going to couch the discussion in a vacuum in which weapons are balanced, I don't see how it follows that balanced weapon unlocks are not a form of horizontal progression. If I reach the level cap and unlock a weapon that is no better or worse than any other weapon, balanced in other words, I've been afforded variety and not an advantage.

Except that even if balanced, a different weapon should allow for different tactics and methods of play, meaning you have a greater ability to adapt from mechanical utility alone than someone who has not progressed to that point.
Granted the benefit is minor.

But take the Brawler for instance and pretend that the Vulcan has been fixed.
The Flak is great for close range, but incredibly unpredictable mid-range, and requires landing a large percentage of your shots to use effectively. The SA Hawkins requires less precision and easier heat management, but is garbage at close range.
The Vulcan however provides a great middle ground between them and a different playstyle (one that some people may find fits them better), but unfortunately is hidden being 12 straight hours of unboosted play with the Brawler.

[Roundlay]

AsianJoyKiller, on November 27 2012 - 01:02 PM, said:

A different weapon should allow for different tactics and methods of play, meaning you have a greater ability to adapt from mechanical utility alone than someone who has not progressed to that point. Granted the benefit is minor.

This is getting into tautology territory. Of course it follows that weapons allowing for different tactics and methods of play are going to give players a greater ability to adapt to situations that the weapon performs best in. The fact that certain players don't have access to a weapon doesn't nullify their ability to play around their chosen weapon's strengths in the same way.

AsianJoyKiller, on November 27 2012 - 01:02 PM, said:

The Vulcan however provides a great middle ground between them and a different playstyle (one that some people may find fits them better), but unfortunately is hidden being 12 straight hours of unboosted play with the Brawler.

Unfortunate, maybe, but speculating on player preference says nothing to the viability of the weapon as an unlock or reward.

Edited by Roundlay, November 27 2012 - 01:40 PM.

[nightsky]

Necro, on November 26 2012 - 11:03 PM, said:

I want unlock-able sounds and gun models