Info > Feedback and Suggestions

Only Positive Ammo #Adjust the Ammos

(1/3) > >>

DrTentacles:
Currently, every ammo in the game has a mix of positive and negative effects, making them (designed) at least, to be a “sidegrade” to Normal ammo, rather than a straight upgrade. However, I believe this philosophy adds hard-to-balance unintended uses for ammos, and overall, makes for a confusing new player experience.

With the impending release of Alliance, it’s important that new players aren’t overwhelmed with information. When I first played Guns, I had to use a calculator to judge how Greased works on various weapon types. This results in players either ignoring ammunition, or taking ammo that looks good on paper, and then coming into conflict with more experienced players who know better. (See, Charged on Gattling Guns.)

This also makes the Gunner class less useful, as normal covers the “weaknesses” of many ammo types perfectly on it’s own.

I would imagine this also makes balancing on Muse’s side difficult, as they have to account for incredibly sub-optimal ammo uses from players, in addition to the many other barriers to learning the game.

I, and many veterans would like to propose a test where all non-range related penalties are removed from all ammo except Lochnagar (Which can be considered an “advanced” ammo), and see how it functions in both Alliance and Skirmish.

BlackenedPies:

--- Quote from: DrTentacles on February 09, 2017, 02:50:56 pm ---I would imagine this also makes balancing on Muse’s side difficult, as they have to account for incredibly sub-optimal ammo uses from players, in addition to the many other barriers to learning the game.

I, and many veterans would like to propose a test where all non-range related penalties are removed from all ammo except Lochnagar (Which can be considered an “advanced” ammo), and see how it functions in both Alliance and Skirmish.

--- End quote ---

Ammo penalties makes balancing easier as there's more opportunities to make use of. Removing negative effects reduces the number of ammos you can create, and makes them all better than regular ammo, giving them an even more meta role on particular guns. In the end you'd find yourself nerfing physical properties like range, velocity, and gun arcs even more. How do you propose balancing any of the seven ammos in this way?

The problem of confusion for new players isn't that ammos are confusing, it's that they don't know what to use when. It's not the ammos that are confusing, it's the game. Removing negative effects makes other ammos more useful, but there will always be an optimal meta ammo. IMO each gun should tell recommended ammos for different ranges, which would eliminate much of the confusion

DrTentacles:
This is a first step, pies, aimed at making the game more intuitive. You are correct--there will always be a meta ammo for each gun. What the gunner class provides is the option to switch ammo in a gun more often. I could see this being more desirable if all ammo types were an upgrade to normal.

Secondly, I don't think this limits design space. This would create a solid core of "basic ammos" for new players. Once they're balanced, Muse could create either "hybrid' ammos, which combine a portion of the  effects of the basics, or ammos with a greater risk/reward factor.

For example, they could introduce a "mega greased" that severely reduced range, but increases DPS past basic greased, or vastly increased jitter.

BlackenedPies:
I like testing changes like this, but not in the same channel as game balance. Otherwise I fear nothing will get done - exactly what I've watched happen in the four weeks since joining the Player Counsel. The problem is that #WildWeek and #CommunityPatch are in the same channel. This is a good Wild Week proposal

DrTentacles:
Well, ideally, I'd like to see this happen on the Alliance end before beta comes out. The success of Alliance is important for everyone invested in the game. We can debate skirmish balance until the end of days, but we know what the Devs are focused on.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page