[Suggestion] Expanded Recoil Mechanics

[Argoms]

I'm trying to apply a "same principle" rule as to what you just said. You want a gun that is half-assed in design and still functions like how another kind of gun would. Glaive is also half-assed because of the bounce mechanics off enemies. Obviously same principle, right? Therefore, if you were the guy who didn't mind half-assed mechanics, then I wouldn't mind conceding on this topic and giving up on trying to reason as to why it is bad.

Exactly what I mean, strawman. I'm saying that if a design is reasonably plausible and would be both fun and balanced in the game, it should not be avoided it just because modern day technology does not allow it. Your only argument for why this shouldn't happen is realism, and calling it half-assed instead of giving reasons shows this- you just don't want it and therefore I am wrong.

[matrixEXO]

Exactly what I mean, strawman. I'm saying that if a design is reasonably plausible and would be both fun and balanced in the game, it should not be avoided it just because modern day technology does not allow it. Your only argument for why this shouldn't happen is realism, and calling it half-assed instead of giving reasons shows this- you just don't want it and therefore I am wrong.

Fun and balanced does not really come hand-in-hand. At most times, fun means breaking balance. Obviously because you are far superior than your opponent and you get to be a juggernaut. But in all honesty, I would rather keep the current scheme of things. Even Gorgon being nerfed to oblivion was because it initially had lasers being fired during it's wind-up time. And it was fun playing the Gorgon.

Edited May 2, 2013 by matrixEXO

[Argoms]

Fun and balanced does not really come hand-in-hand. At most times, fun means breaking balance. Obviously because you are far superior than your opponent and you get to be a juggernaut. But in all honesty, I would rather keep the current scheme of things. Even Gorgon being nerfed to oblivion was because it initially had lasers being fired during it's wind-up time. And it was fun playing the Gorgon.

Are you saying balanced games can't be fun? Yes, there can be fun without balance, but why can't there be fun with it? Does a weapon have to be blatantly overpowered to be found fun to you? Fun doesn't have to mean silly or ridiculous, it can just mean entertaining, you know.

 

And back to my original point- your only argument against a three round burst delayed-recoil gun is "realism", when that clearly isn't a good reason. Now you're changing the topic, which points to the possibility that you're not willing to admit that your argument was flawed.

Edited May 2, 2013 by Argoms

[matrixEXO]

Are you saying balanced games can't be fun? Yes, there can be fun without balance, but why can't there be fun with it? Does a weapon have to be blatantly overpowered to be found fun to you? Fun doesn't have to mean silly or ridiculous, it can just mean entertaining, you know.

 

And back to my original point- your only argument against a three round burst delayed-recoil gun is "realism", when that clearly isn't a good reason. Now you're changing the topic, which points to the possibility that you're not willing to admit that your argument was flawed.

I won't say that balanced games can't be fun. But balance and fun does not go hand-in-hand. At most, touching tips would provide the best of both worlds but normally one will always rue the other.

 

How interesting. So you say that my argument is flawed because I changed topics? Alright. Let's go back to what I said. That gun needs an extremely high rate of fire else it wouldn't be implementable, which was my point after some time. And I believe that without that mechanism to show it off as, it's totally impossible to even do it. I don't like quoting games from other companies since no two games applies the same rules but BO2 happened to have that exact same gun that was mentioned (AN-94) ingame. What happens? They kept to the design (albeit reduce RPM by a wee bit). It's not because they can do anything but it's because they want it to stay true. How a gun fires it's round and how it affects the recoil and so on so forth.

 

A gun needs to reflect the design concept in which it is based upon. Not saying exactly that EVERYTHING needs to have realism, but some things just got to have it. Having a laser Kraken would just make the Lex an obsolete junk anyway since currently DPShot is what counts (which is why people keep saying Hek and Lex all the time) and even more so if you have a higher magazine capacity (7 bursts of the Krakan in contrast to 6 shots from the Lex). Having that recoil for that RPM makes it more interesting, realistic (since you can relate better to a real gun in real life) and different from taking a gun for it's max damage only.

Edited May 2, 2013 by matrixEXO

[Panzermeido]

How interesting. So you say that my argument is flawed because I changed topics? Alright. Let's go back to what I said. That gun needs an extremely high rate of fire else it wouldn't be implementable, which was my point after some time. And I believe that without that mechanism to show it off as, it's totally impossible to even do it. I don't like quoting games from other companies since no two games applies the same rules but BO2 happened to have that exact same gun that was mentioned (AN-94) ingame. What happens? They kept to the design (albeit reduce RPM by a wee bit). It's not because they can do anything but it's because they want it to stay true. How a gun fires it's round and how it affects the recoil and so on so forth.

A gun needs to reflect the design concept in which it is based upon. Not saying exactly that EVERYTHING needs to have realism, but some things just got to have it. Having a laser Kraken would just make the Lex an obsolete junk anyway since currently DPShot is what counts (which is why people keep saying Hek and Lex all the time) and even more so if you have a higher magazine capacity (7 bursts of the Krakan in contrast to 6 shots from the Lex). Having that recoil for that RPM makes it more interesting, realistic (since you can relate better to a real gun in real life) and different from taking a gun for it's max damage only.

I already related to the first part of the message quite a few posts earlier, which you chose to ignore.

The second part is arguing balance as a whole, which isn't a correct argument. If one gun is outright hard and unpleasant to use, and balancing it would make it stronger than similar guns then other certain numbers could be balanced down to keep it nice a cool. Kraken never really stroke me as having "lotsa ammo" or "very high damage potential", because I was forced to fight with it to get my two shots into one point and spend RoF mods to simply hit things instead of actually shooting faster. If it was balanced to have easily controllable recoil, even if offset by lowering damage and clip size slightly, I'd be okay with. It'll still be a great gun, and a fun to use gun, for once.

Edited May 2, 2013 by Panzermeido

[matrixEXO]

I already related to the first part of the message quite a few posts earlier, which you chose to ignore.

The second part is arguing balance as a whole, which isn't a correct argument. If one gun is outright hard and unpleasant to use, and balancing it would make it stronger than similar guns then other certain numbers could be balanced down to keep it nice a cool. Kraken never really stroke me as having "lotsa ammo" or "very high damage potential", because I was forced to fight with it to get my two shots into one point and spend RoF mods to simply hit things instead of actually shooting faster. If it was balanced to have easily controllable recoil, even if offset by lowering damage and clip size slightly, I'd be okay with. It'll still be a great gun, and a fun to use gun, for once.

That would defeat the Kraken's purpose as a high damage burst-fire gun with a decent magazine size. Controllable recoil for burst-fire are recoil where you learn how high it goes before it's next bullet fire. Time and practice can make it one of the most deadliest gun comparable to the Lex.

 

Think of it this way: Lex is your noob gun to high damage whereas Kraken is your pro gun to high damage. Both accomplish the task in it's own way and thus create variety. It's the challenge of the weapon itself that makes it fun AND rewarding. Risk-reward system is lost when you remove that factor of gameplay out of it, which does makes the game less enjoyable (aka less fun). Might not be much to some, but to others it really means something.

 

Long story short, burst-fire weapons are the epitome of risk-reward system that capitalizes on the control of the user to maximize (or minimize) the damage and capability of the weapon, thus creating a more diverse and fun gameplay. You don't like that kind of risk-reward system, don't use it. It's not like all the guns in the game are burst-fire. In fact, there are only 3 guns that are burst-fire: Sicarus, Kraken, Burston.

 

PS: Clip =/= Magazine. 

 

Edit: Risk-reward system has always been the center of balance and also a piece of reality. Thus, the reason why balance does not go hand-in-hand with fun, sometimes the risks outweighs the reward and sometimes the rewards outweigh the risk.

Edited May 2, 2013 by matrixEXO

[Panzermeido]

That would defeat the Kraken's purpose as a high damage burst-fire gun with a decent magazine size. Controllable recoil for burst-fire are recoil where you learn how high it goes before it's next bullet fire. Time and practice can make it one of the most deadliest gun comparable to the Lex.

Think of it this way: Lex is your noob gun to high damage whereas Kraken is your pro gun to high damage. Both accomplish the task in it's own way and thus create variety. It's the challenge of the weapon itself that makes it fun AND rewarding. Risk-reward system is lost when you remove that factor of gameplay out of it, which does makes the game less enjoyable (aka less fun). Might not be much to some, but to others it really means something.

Long story short, burst-fire weapons are the epitome of risk-reward system that capitalizes on the control of the user to maximize (or minimize) the damage and capability of the weapon, thus creating a more diverse and fun gameplay. You don't like that kind of risk-reward system, don't use it. It's not like all the guns in the game are burst-fire. In fact, there are only 3 guns that are burst-fire: Sicarus, Kraken, Burston.

PS: Clip =/= Magazine.

Edit: Risk-reward system has always been the center of balance and also a piece of reality. Thus, the reason why balance does not go hand-in-hand with fun, sometimes the risks outweighs the reward and sometimes the rewards outweigh the risk.

Burst guns aren't the epitome of anything in particular. Burst guns are burst guns. They're main point isn't the recoil, it's the burst and RoF lock. Recoil is an afterthought.

Never does the game say it's supposed to be "high mag" or even "high damage". The design isn't set in stone. If a rebalanced state makes the gun more fun, then there isn't a reason for it not be rebalanced.

The "reset you aim" point is outright bad. I've got enough skill to reset my aim on the run, but my PC is kinda sluggish and my mouse is a five year old Logitech. Does that mean I'm forbidden from using the Kraken to a full extent?

Risk and rewards doesn't require absolute states. Anything should be viable for anyone with additional reward for those who take the time to acquire skills. Kraken is outright lossy for much, much more than half the playerbase right now, and this hurts variety in a quite strong way.

Edited May 2, 2013 by Panzermeido

[matrixEXO]

Burst guns aren't the epitome of anything in particular. Burst guns are burst guns. They're main point isn't the recoil, it's the burst and RoF lock. Recoil is an afterthought.

Never does the game say it's supposed to be "high mag" or even "high damage". The design isn't set in stone. If a rebalanced state makes the gun more fun, then there isn't a reason for it not be rebalanced.

The "reset you aim" point is outright bad. I've got enough skill to reset my aim on the run, but my PC is kinda sluggish and my mouse is a five year old Logitech. Does that mean I'm forbidden from using the Kraken to a full extent?

Risk and rewards doesn't require absolute states. Anything should be viable for anyone with additional reward for those who take the time to acquire skills. Kraken is outright lossy for much, much more than half the playerbase right now, and this hurts variety in a quite strong way.

If burst-fire guns aren't the epitome of anything, then no game would ever include burst-fire guns at all. All games design their burst-fire guns as the high (if not highest) damage weapon that can outright slaughter an enemy if controlled right. The downside of burst-fire is the recoil (making all the shots of a burst difficult to land). Recoil is NEVER an afterthought but an inherent "how to maximize power by reducing accuracy" factor that relates to burst-fire, practically making it the gun that can almost never triumph semi-auto for that strong accuracy (but still beating full auto guns). In-between burst's RoF may be an issue however, since it means that the gun can be oversampled and the bullets do not fly out as fast as it should.

 

If a rebalanced state of an initially challenging gun to be an unchallenging gun is your idea of fun, you'd ought to change your mindset. Challenges are fun. Challenges encourages a player to be better at something. Fun does not fully equal to challenging, don't get me wrong, but challenges increases the fun factor if done right. As for this game, the burst-fire guns are of a decent challenge scale and provides tons of fun for me.

 

If your PC is that wooden, maybe you might need to look into getting a newer low-spec PC that is much better than your current one. As for the mouse, if you are using a trackball mouse then I would admit that it is bad (which you shouldn't since there are cheap optical mouse that are of decent quality). And if you don't want to invest in your PC to get at least decent performance (30FPS, no lower), you ought to not be playing these games since it's... tasking for your PC. Besides that, I was playing Warframe on my laptop (Acer Aspire 4750G) and got crap frames (24~30, randomly dip to 15 then back up) but I managed to play right. Adept to these problems and overcome them with humanly possible capabilities. And by overcoming them, it may also mean just downright giving up on certain things that would just cause more problems than solve them on your current hardware, like the burst-fire guns. Not everyone is a winner.

 

Kraken is outright lossy because most people are playing the game without training to pull the mouse down, apart from the real issue that caused it to not be liked: Screen Shake. The problem with this game is that screen shake is causing more issues than it is immersing the person into the game, not the Kraken itself. I had been using the Kraken just fine until I got my Twin Vipers because I needed to level it up and will have no worries going back to my Kraken.

Edited May 2, 2013 by matrixEXO

[Panzermeido]

If burst-fire guns aren't the epitome of anything, then no game would ever include burst-fire guns at all. All games design their burst-fire guns as the high (if not highest) damage weapon that can outright slaughter an enemy if controlled right. The downside of burst-fire is the recoil (making all the shots of a burst difficult to land). Recoil is NEVER an afterthought but an inherent "how to maximize power by reducing accuracy" factor that relates to burst-fire, practically making it the gun that can almost never triumph semi-auto for that strong accuracy (but still beating full auto guns). In-between burst's RoF may be an issue however, since it means that the gun can be oversampled and the bullets do not fly out as fast as it should.

Lots of verbosity, not much of a point. In terms of pure concept, burst guns are only and exclusively characterized by the fact that they burst. Any in-game gun, recoil or not, that uses bursts as a method to provide unique RoF is a burst gun, whatever the recoil is. Don't change my point. And, contrary to your point, a gun mustn't be an "epitome" or "super-unique never before seen" to be included in a game. If it fits a role, it fits a role. If the developer wants to include it, he includes it. There isn't any "uniqueness minimal requirements" for content to included in games.

 

If a rebalanced state of an initially challenging gun to be an unchallenging gun is your idea of fun, you'd ought to change your mindset. Challenges are fun. Challenges encourages a player to be better at something. Fun does not fully equal to challenging, don't get me wrong, but challenges increases the fun factor if done right. As for this game, the burst-fire guns are of a decent challenge scale and provides tons of fun for me.

If a gun is outright lossy unless you've got a particular skill above the average level of shooting and moving, it requires a rebalance. The challenge should be provided by the enemy, not by your own equipment. Your equipment should be a way to tackle challenges, not a challenge by itself. Recoil is there to balance things, no to make the gun worse for the average player.

 

If your PC is that wooden, maybe you might need to look into getting a newer low-spec PC that is much better than your current one. As for the mouse, if you are using a trackball mouse then I would admit that it is bad (which you shouldn't since there are cheap optical mouse that are of decent quality). And if you don't want to invest in your PC to get at least decent performance (30FPS, no lower), you ought to not be playing these games since it's... tasking for your PC. Besides that, I was playing Warframe on my laptop (Acer Aspire 4750G) and got crap frames (24~30, randomly dip to 15 then back up) but I managed to play right. Adept to these problems and overcome them with humanly possible capabilities. And by overcoming them, it may also mean just downright giving up on certain things that would just cause more problems than solve them on your current hardware, like the burst-fire guns. Not everyone is a winner.

The "EA argument". My PC is higher than the minimal requirements and is actually very close the recommended values. If I fit into the required tech specs, I should be able to enjoy the game in full. Nowhere does it say that "Kraken requires you to have a comfortable mouse to fight with an inherit balance flaw".

 

Kraken is outright lossy because most people are playing the game without training to pull the mouse down, apart from the real issue that caused it to not be liked: Screen Shake. The problem with this game is that screen shake is causing more issues than it is immersing the person into the game, not the Kraken itself. I had been using the Kraken just fine until I got my Twin Vipers because I needed to level it up and will have no worries going back to my Kraken.

Again, training to pull the mouse down is a "fight against the game" solution. Players with the minimal skillset required to play the game should find the arsenal fun and useful even if they don't want to invest hours to learn motoric tricks. Right now, unless you invest this time, Kraken is one of the worst pistols in the game.

[matrixEXO]

Lots of verbosity, not much of a point. In terms of pure concept, burst guns are only and exclusively characterized by the fact that they burst. Any in-game gun, recoil or not, that uses bursts as a method to provide unique RoF is a burst gun, whatever the recoil is. Don't change my point. And, contrary to your point, a gun mustn't be an "epitome" or "super-unique never before seen" to be included in a game. If it fits a role, it fits a role. If the developer wants to include it, he includes it. There isn't any "uniqueness minimal requirements" for content to included in games.

 

If a gun is outright lossy unless you've got a particular skill above the average level of shooting and moving, it requires a rebalance. The challenge should be provided by the enemy, not by your own equipment. Your equipment should be a way to tackle challenges, not a challenge by itself. Recoil is there to balance things, no to make the gun worse for the average player.

 

The "EA argument". My PC is higher than the minimal requirements and is actually very close the recommended values. If I fit into the required tech specs, I should be able to enjoy the game in full. Nowhere does it say that "Kraken requires you to have a comfortable mouse to fight with an inherit balance flaw".

 

Again, training to pull the mouse down is a "fight against the game" solution. Players with the minimal skillset required to play the game should find the arsenal fun and useful even if they don't want to invest hours to learn motoric tricks. Right now, unless you invest this time, Kraken is one of the worst pistols in the game.

Gonna jump over almost all of them since our debate seems to be... lengthening and I don't like writing a novel on our debate. In the end, each to our point about recoil.

 

As for fighting against the game, players with minimal skillset should find the Kraken a good close-range weapon till they train up their skillset to make it a good mid-range weapon (at least). I started the Kraken without using the recoil-cancel technique and happen to find it really good at close range. I learned to do recoil-cancel later on and it becomes much more deadlier. Before I learned to do recoil-cancel, I did what was actually more obvious for some people who knew about the firing time and height after initial shot, aim down for the next shot to hit the head, effectively giving 1 headshot and 1 bodyshot bursts of fire. All guns, even burst-fire, have a good starting line and, with practice, are able to reach niche spots originally intended.

 

Alright, gonna end our back-and-forth... conversation here. I don't think you enjoy having to go on and on and I certainly don't.

Edited May 2, 2013 by matrixEXO

[Panzermeido]

Gonna jump over almost all of them since our debate seems to be... lengthening and I don't like writing a novel on our debate. In the end, each to our point about recoil.

 

As for fighting against the game, players with minimal skillset should find the Kraken a good close-range weapon till they train up their skillset to make it a good mid-range weapon (at least). I started the Kraken without using the recoil-cancel technique and happen to find it really good at close range. I learned to do recoil-cancel later on and it becomes much more deadlier. Before I learned to do recoil-cancel, I did what was actually more obvious for some people who knew about the firing time and height after initial shot, aim down for the next shot to hit the head. All guns, even burst-fire, have a good starting line and, with practice, are able to reach niche spots originally intended.

 

Alright, gonna end our back-and-forth... conversation here. I don't think you enjoy having to go on and on and I certainly don't.

Yeah, I agree.If it boils down to tastes, it shouldn't be argued.