Does All Weapons Being Sidegrades Really Work With Warframe's Design?

[MJ12]

This is a serious question here that I've been pondering for a few days.

 

Warframe is a game which currently is heavily built on farming weapons and new gear. However, if everything's a sidegrade that means you don't have quite as much impetus to collect equipment. The Mastery system right now is the sole reason you'd use weapons which are sidegrades, assuming you already have a weapon that does something you like and won't get better mileage out of another weapon. It also limits stats to some extent because weapons have to be in strict balance with each other.

 

Now, obviously, having weapon tiers would still require balancing within those tiers and a whole host of issues about how to make higher-tier weapons less accessible to ensure that people will still use lower-tier weapons. Which is why I'm not suggesting having straight upgrades.

 

However, games like Mass Effect 3's MP mode show that strict upgrades can work and work pretty well. The Black Widow is pretty much a strict upgrade to the Mantis, with about the same weight, more damage, 300% the magazine size, and more spare ammo. The Lancer is basically a strict upgrade to the Avenger, the Hurricane is basically a strict upgrade of the Tempest, so on and so forth. To be fair, ME3 has the random weapons thing going on which means you can't just instantly zoom up to a Harrier/Lancer/Hurricane, but having higher-tier weapons cost a lot more and take a bunch more resources to build, and/or use low-tier weapons as components would allow, to some extent, a similar limitation method.

 

The question I'm asking is "in a non-competitive PvE third person shooter action-RPG in the vein of Diablo, Torchlight, or Mass Effect 3's MP mode, is weapons being sidegrades actually viable? Would it better if there were weapons that were allowed to be strictly better than other weapons, as long as the performance differences are enough that there's still a reason to use lower-level weapons?"

 

Obviously it'd mean few people would use low-tier weapons in high-difficulty areas, but is that really a problem? As long as people use those weapons at some point for a few hours, the effort in their design isn't wasted, IMO, and they serve their purpose. I don't want useless weapons, but I don't think it's inherently bad if there's a weapon which fills a niche but does it better overall.

 

Thoughts, feedback, and theorycrafting welcome.

[MetalGerbil]

the general idea is that you always have a massive set of options to pick from rather than working to the "high tier" stuff and finding most of the time spent in wep design is long behind you.

 

look a diablo since you mentioned it. 99.999% of the items in that game are garbage. literally junk that is little more than fancy vendor fodder.

 

as to mass effect, its a single player RPG, it works because you are basically going down a strict line. weapon upgrades in those games function as little more than a mechanic to keep you busy, throwing one away to get the next.

 

in a game like this you cant waste that time as people will not simply play it for months if you get to a point where you hit endgame and get all the "good stuff". are you still playing mass effect? cause im not, old news by now. everything being an option keeps people around and doesnt waste valuable development time on "throw aways"

 

things will get harder and they have talked about "weapon progression" beyond mods. its coming and from the sounds of it it utilizes and elevates current weps. this makes far more sense and gets the most out of the system.

Edited May 15, 2013 by MetalGerbil

[Tekmet]

Normally for most games I'd be in total agreement with you. For Warframe however, I find myself rather liking the fact that all the weapons are on basically the same level, rather than having one "best" weapon for each class of weapons. To me they all have just enough variation to fit different playstyles, and different warframe styles.

 

I would love to see more weapons added, which I'm sure will come in time.

 

On a side note, one idea that might help add variation would be for DE to be a bit more giving on the polarity slots for weapons.

[Ferghus]

I don't particularly like all the weapons being sidegrades, but the concept does have its merits.

 

If we had a sort of gear treadmill with progressive direct upgrades for each type of weapon, I could see it promoting a substantial amount of elitism among the player base. If they ever implemented a vote kick or some other tool to filter who you can run public games with, I could see a lot of people griefing other players due to the perception of them being undergeared.

 

I'm also fairly content with the ideas they've been throwing around to prestige existing weaponry, so we eventually will be getting a little more gear progression, just in a way that doesn't invalidate any particular weapon.

[MJ12]

the general idea is that you always have a massive set of options to pick from rather than working to the "high tier" stuff and finding most of the time spent in wep design is long behind you.

 

The problem is if you have a set of options to pick from, and all weapons are equally viable, why pick anything else but the weapons you prefer and stick with them ad infinitum? Whereas if you have a whole bunch of high-tier weapons that take a while to get to, it at least means you spend a lot more time using weapons other than "the high tier weapon which most fits your playstyle".

 

 

look a diablo since you mentioned it. 99.999% of the items in that game are garbage. literally junk that is little more than fancy vendor fodder.

 

You exaggerate. That's only in the very late game or when you're repeatedly farming a boss for a certain drop. There's a pretty regular amount of upgrading happening in Diablo, which is specifically because of how gear generally is upgraded as you go along.

 

 

as to mass effect, its a single player RPG, it works because you are basically going down a strict line. weapon upgrades in those games function as little more than a mechanic to keep you busy, throwing one away to get the next.

 

This makes me think you haven't played Mass Effect 3, because that's about the opposite of how new weapons functioned in ME3, they weren't exactly a strict line. ME3MP moreso, and I specified ME3 Multiplayer because of that.

 

 

in a game like this you cant waste that time as people will not simply play it for months if you get to a point where you hit endgame and get all the "good stuff". are you still playing mass effect? cause im not, old news by now. everything being an option keeps people around and doesnt waste valuable development time on "throw aways"

 

Yes, I'm still playing Mass Effect 3 multiplayer, and a ton of other people are, because their game design is actually pretty good and makes up for all the bugs. And honestly, throwaways aren't actually a problem. As long as the weapon sees enough use to justify the time spent on it, it doesn't matter if most people will discard it come the endgame. There's a ton of weapons better than the Avenger in ME3MP, for example, but because it's an okay AR that isn't actively bad people will use it for a while before they get one of the (many) direct upgrades to it.

 

So the dev time isn't wasted because people will, in fact, use weapons which aren't top-tier in the process of getting top-tier weapons. If, say, your top tier Mjolnir Gatling Shotgun or whatever required a lv30 Boar as one of its crafting ingredients, you'd have to use that Boar for several hours before you could get your top tier automatic shotgun. It's not impossible to make low-tier weapons relevant.

Edited May 15, 2013 by MJ12

[CY13ERPUNK]

AFAIK there are plans to have many more weapons/gear/frames/etc being rank/xp locked/gated in the future

 

i do approve of most all of the equipment being sidegrades and potentially all "endgame" functional however

 

but having some being xp locked makes the transitional period have more limited choices and allows tenno (also kinda forces) to use a variety of gear along the way, slowly building up to the "big guns", while learning the ins and outs

 

ideally of course

[Xylia]

All the weapons being balanced/sidegrades works nice in that you pick your weapon for your Warframe/Playstyle choice.

 

Going Solo against Captain Vor?

 

You could have some fun and take a Paris + Kraken.

 

Going after Jackal in a group full of impatient people? Bring that Gorgon by all means!

 

Trying to play a "Tank" who is running Point in Defense? Get Rhino and slap a Hek on him and go to town with anything that gets past the roamers.

 

You pick your weapon for the situation you're in, the enemy you're fighting, and the Warframe you're using.

 

You DON'T pick a weapon "Because it is higher tier/level/whatnot".

[escape123]

I like the idea of sidegrades rather than 'the one uber ultra powerful and efficient gun'.

 

DE has done a great job so far for balance - specialise in various attributes

[MJ12]

All the weapons being balanced/sidegrades works nice in that you pick your weapon for your Warframe/Playstyle choice.

In theory, yes. In practice what happens is that people stick with a few weapons that they really like, which leads to a similar result. Honestly sidegrades are far better in a game where you can switch between weapons easily (i.e. you can carry more than 2 guns and replace them quickly), or weapons are generally all identical in the same class (cough Call of Duty cough).

Going Solo against Captain Vor?

 

You could have some fun and take a Paris + Kraken.

 

Going after Jackal in a group full of impatient people? Bring that Gorgon by all means!

 

Trying to play a "Tank" who is running Point in Defense? Get Rhino and slap a Hek on him and go to town with anything that gets past the roamers.

 

You pick your weapon for the situation you're in, the enemy you're fighting, and the Warframe you're using.

 

You DON'T pick a weapon "Because it is higher tier/level/whatnot".

You're right that with sidegrades you get different loadouts. However what happens is you also get people using the same loadout all the time. If high tier weapons are actually noted and balanced as such, and thus take time and effort to get to, people will want to put more effort in, which means more longevity which means more game time spent acquiring them. Which means everyone benefits, ASSUMING there's a fairly solid choice of high-tier weapons. I am fully in support of the Hek having been weakened from its godly status because it was the only god-tier weapon, for example.

The other problem with insisting weapons are strict sidegrades of each other is the rollercoaster nerf/buff cycle this engenders because EVERY weapon must be balanced with EVERY OTHER WEAPON instead of weapons balance being largely "by tier".

Fighting games try to get character balance, but they accept that there will be high, mid, and low-tier guns and this isn't an inherent problem as long as you have plenty of each. ME3's guns worked because the high tier had a few guns from every category (even SMGs which were generally bad) and a bunch more weapons which weren't high tier that could easily function at that level in the hands of certain character classes.

And yes, they did rebalance some weapons, and screw up and over-nerf others, or make just plain bad ones.

On the other hand, accepting that some weapons would be outright better than others and letting it happen didn't do them any disfavors.

[MJ12]

I like the idea of sidegrades rather than 'the one uber ultra powerful and efficient gun'.

 

DE has done a great job so far for balance - specialise in various attributes

I'm not saying have ONE endgame gun. That's terrible. I'm saying have multiple endgame guns, filling most of the niches, while a skilled player with the right playstyle and mods can make non endgame guns competitive. Most of the upgrades in ME3MP or Diablo style games didn't do the exact same thing as their downgrades with +10% on all numbers.

Take the Mattock and Harrier. The Harrier does slightly more damage per shot and has way less spare ammo. It's also got more recoil and is heavier. The reason it's a strict upgrade? It has autofire, which means you can get that peak DPS more easily. Is it a sidegrade or an upgrade? I'd say upgrade. Yet it doesn't behave in the same way as its precedent weapon and the precedent weapon is still viable in high level play.

I agree that single superguns are bad and so are guns which are just "like gun X but with bigger numbers", but I think it's not inherently bad, and could be good, to have guns that are "like X but overall better, although gun X has some advantages as well."

[Loswaith]

The problem is if you have a set of options to pick from, and all weapons are equally viable, why pick anything else but the weapons you prefer and stick with them ad infinitum? Whereas if you have a whole bunch of high-tier weapons that take a while to get to, it at least means you spend a lot more time using weapons other than "the high tier weapon which most fits your playstyle".

...

Tiered weapons have the same issue, once you get to the top weapon you stick with that (or those) weapon ad infinitum as well, not because you may like that top weapon but because you are gimping yourself if you dont.  The game difficulity will force you to upgrade (higher end gameplay balanced with higher end weaponry).

 

For example if we say the Lex is the top tier for the Lato as semi automatic pistols.  You play with the lato a bit, then finally get the lex.  you now just throw away the lato no matter how much you like it over the Lex, because its clearly not as good.  Sure one step may mean its kinda of viable to use the Lato still, though if there was a 5 tiers, with lato at the bottom and lex at the top, you wouldn't be viable using the lato at that point so never use it no matter how much you may actually like it.  The alternative being the lex is created simply as a higher stat lato, which makes the distinction between weapons meaningless.  The mods happily handle this factor of a weapon being essentially the same thing with higher stats.

 

Side grading however lets you chop and change weapons at your whim because any weapon is viable to use, it just comes down to your play style, the play style you want at that time, the character you are playing, your mood or even just whimsy.  You have a choice what to use rather than using the lex anytime you want an automatic pistol.

 

At the end of the day having 50 functionally distinct weapons is better than having 100 weapons that are realy only 20 functionally different ones, its also half the work for the art team (unless you make the weapons look the same, defeating the purpose of different weapons).

 

Essentially the side-grades work well in conjunction with the Mod system.

Edited May 15, 2013 by Loswaith

[MJ12]

Tiered weapons have the same issue, once you get to the top weapon you stick with that (or those) weapon ad infinitum as well, not because you may like that top weapon but because you are gimping yourself if you dont.  The game difficulity will force you to upgrade (higher end gameplay balanced with higher end weaponry).

 

That's right, except the journey to that point takes significantly longer, and if you have a system which encourages upgrading weapons (like ME3) there is often a gray area where your low-tier weapons are better than your high-tier weapons because they've got more upgrades. If you've got a prestige system and weapon R&D it might take a while to baby your Super Gun Mk I until it can match your Pea Shooter Mk XXXVII. That, I think, works pretty well.

 

For example if we say the Lex is the top tier for the Lato as semi automatic pistols.  You play with the lato a bit, then finally get the lex.  you now just throw away the lato no matter how much you like it over the Lex, because its clearly not as good.  Sure one step may mean its kinda of viable to use the Lato still, though if there was a 5 tiers, with lato at the bottom and lex at the top, you wouldn't be viable using the lato at that point so never use it no matter how much you may actually like it.  The alternative being the lex is created simply as a higher stat lato, which makes the distinction between weapons meaningless.  The mods happily handle this factor of a weapon being essentially the same thing with higher stats.

 

Well, I think that:

 

1. There should largely be enough weapons in the top tier to cover all the bases

 

2. Top-tier weapons shouldn't simply be top tier because 'they have bigger numbers', but because they have different 'soft' stats.

 

So it wouldn't be "the Lato is bottom tier and the Lex is top tier", it'd be "the Lato is bottom tier and the top tier equivalent is the Kritsa, which does a bit more damage (28? 30?) but has a larger magazine (20 base) and fully automatic fire, plus a higher fire rate. Or maybe it's not full-auto but has 100% guaranteed criticals on headshots. If you get my drift?

 

I don't think upgrades should ever be "like gun X but with +25% to all stats". That's boring and something I agree should be avoided. Same with having one or two superweapons and everything else being way behind.

 

Side grading however lets you chop and change weapons at your whim because any weapon is viable to use, it just comes down to your play style, the play style you want at that time, the character you are playing, your mood or even just whimsy.  You have a choice what to use rather than using the lex anytime you want an automatic pistol.

 

And for a game based on farming and collecting guns ad infinitum this is actually a bad thing. Mass Effect 3 managed to make its entire game about collecting new things because it had tiered weapons, so you spent a ton of time trying to collect high-tier equipment and upgrade it. That's the 'endgame' right now, but if you only have sidegrades you immediately start in the endgame. For a game based on farming equipment this is a huge longevity problem because there's no early and middle game, as you instantly start with the best weapons and gear.

 

Games based on grinding/farming have tiered equipment for a reason, and I applaud DE for trying to buck the trend but increasingly I feel like it doesn't really work. Outside of cool gimmick weapons I don't really have much motivation to build more stuff now, outside of Warframes because those have a lot more uniqueness than weapons (and can work as sidegrades).

 

At the end of the day having 50 distinct weapons is better than having 100 weapons that are realy only 20 functionally different ones, its also half the work for the art team.

 

How does "100 weapons that are really only 20 functionally different ones" follow? More importantly tiered weapons actually make 'gimmick' weapons easier to balance, because you can just use the 'soft' factors as reasons why a weapon is higher-tier. I brought up the Harrier and Mattock for a reason. The sole reason the Harrier is two tiers above the Mattock is because it has full-auto instead of forcing you to break your finger. There aren't all that many direct upgrades in Mass Effect 3's MP mode, which is why I think their 'everything being a sidegrade is boring' philosophy works.

 

I guess you have the Phaeston and Avenger? But generally a lot of the high-tier weapons are low-tier weapons which have a beneficial gimmick. Like for example, assuming the Gorgon is an upgrade of the Braton, its gimmick might be "its fire rate is much higher while sustaining fire and it has a big magazine to help with that". Or the Hek being an upgrade of the Strun, its gimmick might be "more accurate and no damage dropoff". And so on.

 

The low-tier weapon is still capable of performing, but the high-tier weapon is better in either one of two ways:

 

1. More flexible

 

2. More powerful in a specific situation.

[Loswaith]

That's right, except the journey to that point takes significantly longer, and if you have a system which encourages upgrading weapons (like ME3) there is often a gray area where your low-tier weapons are better than your high-tier weapons because they've got more upgrades. If you've got a prestige system and weapon R&D it might take a while to baby your Super Gun Mk I until it can match your Pea Shooter Mk XXXVII. That, I think, works pretty well.

...

This is simply making people do heaps more busy work to get the weapon they actually want or preventing people using a weapon they like because it got upgraded to something functionally better.  Isnt it nice though however to be able to use any weapon you have previously leveled knowing that you arent gimping yourslef in the process.

Most games with upgrading have the issue of people simply dont bother modifying it because they know its a waste of time since they wont use that weapon after a certain point anyway.

 

 

...

So it wouldn't be "the Lato is bottom tier and the Lex is top tier", it'd be "the Lato is bottom tier and the top tier equivalent is the Kritsa, which does a bit more damage (28? 30?) but has a larger magazine (20 base) and fully automatic fire, plus a higher fire rate. Or maybe it's not full-auto but has 100% guaranteed criticals on headshots. If you get my drift?

 

I don't think upgrades should ever be "like gun X but with +25% to all stats". That's boring and something I agree should be avoided. Same with having one or two superweapons and everything else being way behind.

...

The lato and lex are simply name examples within warframe (because they are similar), doesnt matter what you call the two types of guns, they could of been called bill and bob for all it matters. 

However you upgrade to the "krista", you now made 3 weapons obsolete, the lato, viper and sicarus, as now it subsumes the differences of those three.  Where do those upgrades now fit in the space of things?

I also never said all stats needed to be upgraded to be considered an upgrade, even just one stat increasing increases the weapons effective DPS, hence it becomes better to not one but all weapons of that equivlent tier.

 

 

...

And for a game based on farming and collecting guns ad infinitum this is actually a bad thing. Mass Effect 3 managed to make its entire game about collecting new things because it had tiered weapons, so you spent a ton of time trying to collect high-tier equipment and upgrade it. That's the 'endgame' right now, but if you only have sidegrades you immediately start in the endgame. For a game based on farming equipment this is a huge longevity problem because there's no early and middle game, as you instantly start with the best weapons and gear.  ...

Your assuming that the game is only ever going to be about farming and collecting, the game is in beta, and the devs have clearly stated thats not the intent for the game (it's just where it is currently).  Sure you start in what seems to be the end game of Mass Effect 3 multi-player, but this isnt Mass Effect 3 either.

You would also be hard pressed to convince someone with a rank 0 weapon that they have the best gear in the game compared to a fully moded rank 60 one.  The game now is about farming mods not weapons/equipment (warframes are kinda grey area as they are more akin to character classes than armour), especially since you can buy most weapons with credits.

 

 

...

Games based on grinding/farming have tiered equipment for a reason, and I applaud DE for trying to buck the trend but increasingly I feel like it doesn't really work. Outside of cool gimmick weapons I don't really have much motivation to build more stuff now, outside of Warframes because those have a lot more uniqueness than weapons (and can work as sidegrades).   ...

True, however most of those games also have the grinding treadmill of getting one tier of gear so you can get the next tier of gear, until it hits the top and stagnates with anything but the top obsolete, thus people will be asking for better gear again.  WoW is a good case and point of this factor.

 

 

...

How does "100 weapons that are really only 20 functionally different ones" follow? More importantly tiered weapons actually make 'gimmick' weapons easier to balance, because you can just use the 'soft' factors as reasons why a weapon is higher-tier. I brought up the Harrier and Mattock for a reason. The sole reason the Harrier is two tiers above the Mattock is because it has full-auto instead of forcing you to break your finger. There aren't all that many direct upgrades in Mass Effect 3's MP mode, which is why I think their 'everything being a sidegrade is boring' philosophy works. ...

Reguardless of stats if a weapon plays differently it's functionally different.  Obviously the viper is functionally different to a lato which is functionally different to a sicarus.

Whether you hold a button down once or have to tap it (not sure what your doing with your fingers to break them), if the weapon fires the exact same speed (ie say 10 shots a second), they are functionally the same.  They play the same way with the same purpose, all you have done is forced someone to get a second one thats a little better and made the previous one obsolete.

However if you have the lato autofire (lets call it kristo) that is say the fire speed equivlent timing to the 3 shots from a sicarus, the sicarus and lato become obsolete, because the upgrade is better than both.  Why spend the effort upgrading lato if you will get rid of it anyway?  Many games with upgardes have this issue, because players dont want to waste things.

 

Tiered weapons are actually harder to balance because instead of one single base line you have one for each tier.  If your default item is between tiers do you put it in the lower one risking its too strong for that tier or put it into the higer one and risk it being too weak, or have to push it to an unintended balance point.  With a single base line you can easly tweak it down if its too powerful or tweak it up if it's underpowered, you only have one line to move towards.

 

 

...

I guess you have the Phaeston and Avenger? But generally a lot of the high-tier weapons are low-tier weapons which have a beneficial gimmick. Like for example, assuming the Gorgon is an upgrade of the Braton, its gimmick might be "its fire rate is much higher while sustaining fire and it has a big magazine to help with that". Or the Hek being an upgrade of the Strun, its gimmick might be "more accurate and no damage dropoff". And so on.

 

The low-tier weapon is still capable of performing, but the high-tier weapon is better in either one of two ways:

 

1. More flexible

 

2. More powerful in a specific situation.

 

Wait.. so your happy to upgrade a tier if a weapon is a higher tier due to a 'gimmick' but dont want to side-grade for a 'gimmick'?

 

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make with points 1 and 2 but thats exacly why side-grading is better, you have weapons that function differently in different roles, though none are better or worse than any other one across all situations.  Some may be better than some weapons in all situations (ok at X, Y and Z) but with side grading there are weapons that are best for role X (or role Y or role Z), not so great for role Y and Z (or role X and Z, or role X and Y).  It removes that bland generic weapon/s that become obsolete anyway letting developers and artists spend their time on better things.

 

If the longer progression is all you realy are after, having a weapon need to earn the affinity for the extra 30 ranks from a catalyst, ontop of the initial 30 (31-60, given required affinity growth for each rank its likely to increase the time to max a weapon by 3-4 times) would achieve the same goal without obsolecence.  The 'prestieging/paragon' system DE is considering will basically do this also (as is likely closer to what you are after).

Edited May 15, 2013 by Loswaith

[MJ12]

I lost my reply due to a freak computer accident so I'll make it quick.

 

Tiered weapons are actually harder to balance because instead of one single base line you have one for each tier.  If your default item is between tiers do you put it in the lower one risking its too strong for that tier or put it into the higer one and risk it being too weak, or have to push it to an unintended balance point.  With a single base line you can easly tweak it down if its too powerful or tweak it up if it's underpowered, you only have one line to move towards.

 

Not really. A higher tiered weapon can be weaker than all other high-tier weapons yet still stay perfectly usable and viable because it's inherently got better stats than other weapons. I mean, sure, the Reegar Carbine in ME3MP is way stronger than the Pirahna in the same niche but the Pirahna is still a very good and perfectly usable weapon. And that's the worst-case balance scenario: Two weapons attempting to fill the exact same niche with different methods in the same tier, yet both are still worthy of that tier and perfectly good weapons.

 

Wait.. so your happy to upgrade a tier if a weapon is a higher tier due to a 'gimmick' but dont want to side-grade for a 'gimmick'?

 

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make with points 1 and 2 but thats exacly why side-grading is better, you have weapons that function differently in different roles, though none are better or worse than any other one across all situations.  Some may be better than some weapons in all situations (ok at X, Y and Z) but with side grading there are weapons that are best for role X (or role Y or role Z), not so great for role Y and Z (or role X and Z, or role X and Y).  It removes that bland generic weapon/s that become obsolete anyway letting developers and artists spend their time on better things.

 

Actually what it does is encourage the use of bland generic weapons. You see, these gimmicks make the weapon stronger. Which means other qualities of the weapon have to be nerfed. Which mean that if all weapons are strict sidegrades of each other, the gimmick weapon is always worse. Take the Paris and the recently-buffed Snipetron. The Paris is worse in 90% of situations due to its lower sustainable fire rate, much lower burst fire rate, issues with accuracy due to non-instant-hit arrows and projectile arc, and ability to waste half-damage shots by not fully charging it.

 

All this for a silent weapon that can occasionally multihit targets in a line. I doubt we'll see a significant Paris buff either.

 

The Ol' reliable, the Braton/Vandal, after the Gorgon nerfs, is a way better weapon for 90% of the level because the Gorgon is only great for the 10% when you're in a terrible situation. Because it has the whole spinup-spindown-super high rate of fire HMG gimmick.

 

IIRC TF2, with Valve (who really know their balance backwards and forwards) has a ton of problems with certain so-called sidegrades being either objectively better or objectively worse because gimmicks are nigh-impossible to actually balance. So why try to flail at the problem? Why not accept that some weapons are going to just simply be higher-tier than other weapons and only nerf weapons if they're so good that they make literally every other weapon pointless?

 

The Hek, for argument's sake, is a perfect example of exactly that kind of high-tier weapon. It had a faster fire rate than the Strun which let it almost pretend to be the Boar, higher per-shot damage, higher accuracy, and made a whole host of weapons obsolete. Is that bad balance? Sure. But that doesn't mean higher-tier weapons are a bad concept.

 

If the longer progression is all you realy are after, having a weapon need to earn the affinity for the extra 30 ranks from a catalyst, ontop of the initial 30 (31-60, given required affinity growth for each rank its likely to increase the time to max a weapon by 3-4 times) would achieve the same goal without obsolecence.  The 'prestieging/paragon' system DE is considering will basically do this also (as is likely closer to what you are after).

 

What your suggestion does is force you to grind through the game with the same weapons for longer, increasing monotony and discouraging switching up weapons. You find a weapon early, then stick with it. Meanwhile, a straight upgrade system actually means you progress through multiple weapons types, and get to play with weapons which may not have the exact characteristics you want. The Hurricane being the best SMG in ME3 has taught me a lot about dealing with punishing recoil, something I wouldn't have ever learned if the Hurricane was a sidegrade because I'd just have used a low-recoil gun like the Tempest and never considered it.

 

It wouldn't have been worth it. However, because the Hurricane was a high-tier weapon, my choices were either to compensate for its recoil by using a valuable mod slot on recoil dampening, playing it on a handful of characters with recoil compensation bonuses, or just learning to use it. So I did the third and it was more interesting.

 

Basically, in a sidegrade system, most people stick with 1 gun after finding what they like, unless they're one of those flavor-of-the-month powergamers who buys and uses the gun which got buffed the most/is widely considered OP until it gets nerfed. In an upgrade system most people will probably run through more weapons and play for longer because they have more goals to work towards and more visible progression.

 

Strict upgrades, IMO, work better for dungeon crawlers than 'sidegrades'. Sidegrades should be in weapon class (rifles, shotguns, pistols, and melee should all be equally viable), not specific weapons.

[PaperAlien]

Yes, it definitely works. Mass Effect 3's system turns out to be pretty bad, with new players starting off with squirt guns, and the most powerful guns being Ultra-Rares that literally do about triple the damage (in Warframe this may seem small, but remember than in Warframe level scaling is much stronger than in ME3, so in ME3 relatively small changes (like 25%) are really big). The system used here is great, because it means that ideally (balance issues aside), every weapon will see equal use throughout the game, whereas the lower-tier weapons in ME3 are doomed to become extinct when a higher-tier option appears. Actual progression of weapon power is still achieved through mods. So nothing's really missing.

[Loswaith]

...

Not really. A higher tiered weapon can be weaker than all other high-tier weapons yet still stay perfectly usable and viable because it's inherently got better stats than other weapons. I mean, sure, the Reegar Carbine in ME3MP is way stronger than the Pirahna in the same niche but the Pirahna is still a very good and perfectly usable weapon. And that's the worst-case balance scenario: Two weapons attempting to fill the exact same niche with different methods in the same tier, yet both are still worthy of that tier and perfectly good weapons. ...

The pirahna may be a good weapon but why would anyone use it if it fits the same role and does things worse than the Reegar Carbine? The Reegar just made the Pirahna obsolete, thus anyone with the Pirahna may as well throw it away when they get the Reegar, no point in keeping it.

...

Actually what it does is encourage the use of bland generic weapons. You see, these gimmicks make the weapon stronger. Which means other qualities of the weapon have to be nerfed. Which mean that if all weapons are strict sidegrades of each other, the gimmick weapon is always worse. Take the Paris and the recently-buffed Snipetron. The Paris is worse in 90% of situations due to its lower sustainable fire rate, much lower burst fire rate, issues with accuracy due to non-instant-hit arrows and projectile arc, and ability to waste half-damage shots by not fully charging it.

All this for a silent weapon that can occasionally multihit targets in a line. I doubt we'll see a significant Paris buff either. ...

How are any of the weapons in warframe bland or generic? How is a side grade worse, a Lato with twice the fire rate but half the damage is equivlent to a Lato, no worse, no better just different. A lato with twice the fire rate is clearly better than a normal lato making it obsolete, so why use it. Personaly I think the Viper is a much less generic weapon than a lato that just got a fire-rate increase.

Why should the paris get a buff, it clearly can do the same damage as the snipertron with the option of doing less (non-full draw), and the posibiltiy of doing more (piercing into a second target). [sarcasm]Though clearly paris is being ignored and wasnt given the very first weapon specific mod[/sacrasm].

...

The Ol' reliable, the Braton/Vandal, after the Gorgon nerfs, is a way better weapon for 90% of the level because the Gorgon is only great for the 10% when you're in a terrible situation. Because it has the whole spinup-spindown-super high rate of fire HMG gimmick. ...

In most cases sure, though I've happily used a gorgon through entire missions (bullets fire as soon as you hit the trigger with very little delay, there is no spinup time to fire, just to fire realy fast), because I understand it's weaknesses, and it devistaes bosses. The braton doesnt have any real weaknesses but doesnt have any strengths either, likewise it cant devistate a boss either. Now if an upgraded braton (assuming its a higher tier) with said ability to devistate a boss was an option, that makes the gorgon (an otherwise interesting weapon) used very little. What about an upgraded gorgon that was useable most of the time without the spinup issue, effectivly making the only difference between then clip size and reload speed. Clearly a boring and generic difference, since they are now effectly the same gun.

...

The Hek, for argument's sake, is a perfect example of exactly that kind of high-tier weapon. It had a faster fire rate than the Strun which let it almost pretend to be the Boar, higher per-shot damage, higher accuracy, and made a whole host of weapons obsolete. Is that bad balance? Sure. But that doesn't mean higher-tier weapons are a bad concept. ...

They are a bad concept in this case because it makes all the other work and effort put into those previous weapons pointless, becuase you simply will never use them again because they are clearly inferior. Anyone using those other weapons will feel like they are underpowered. Thus almost everyone ended up using the Hek. Everyone using the same one weapon hardly makes a game interesting in my book. Likewise if someone didnt have the Hek and wanted to join a defence mission going high levels, they may have been denied that oppertunity becuse they dont have the Hek. A bad concept for what is essentially a game about grouping with other people.

...

What your suggestion does is force you to grind through the game with the same weapons for longer, increasing monotony and discouraging switching up weapons. You find a weapon early, then stick with it. Meanwhile, a straight upgrade system actually means you progress through multiple weapons types, and get to play with weapons which may not have the exact characteristics you want. The Hurricane being the best SMG in ME3 has taught me a lot about dealing with punishing recoil, something I wouldn't have ever learned if the Hurricane was a sidegrade because I'd just have used a low-recoil gun like the Tempest and never considered it.

It wouldn't have been worth it. However, because the Hurricane was a high-tier weapon, my choices were either to compensate for its recoil by using a valuable mod slot on recoil dampening, playing it on a handful of characters with recoil compensation bonuses, or just learning to use it. So I did the third and it was more interesting. ...

Not realy as anything 30+ ranks is not needed, its simply icing and gives a sence of development for those that have chosen to use the weapon they like using. They can freely go and try another weapon and if they dont like it can go back to the original one and still feel like they are getting some progression with it, through the ability to add further mods.

Your idea forces people to grind through weapons they dont like (or force them to mod it to compensate for what they didnt like), to get one that maybe they do, maybe they wont like the upgrade either and just wasted allot of time. Side-grade would let them try the first one, not like it and then try a second one and see if they prefer that, if they dont they can go back and use the first one again, or try something else. Upgrades dont really allow that.

The factor is if you wouldn't have tried the Hurricane that's your issue not the game's one. However you were forced to use a certain mod on it to make it ok for you to use (whether you actually like it or not), because you had no option to use the tempest as effectivly. The tempest was clearly less effective when compared to the Hurricane. Clearly it forced you (the stick approach) to use it, rather than maybe encouraging you (the carrot approach) to trying it.

...

Basically, in a sidegrade system, most people stick with 1 gun after finding what they like, unless they're one of those flavor-of-the-month powergamers who buys and uses the gun which got buffed the most/is widely considered OP until it gets nerfed. In an upgrade system most people will probably run through more weapons and play for longer because they have more goals to work towards and more visible progression.

Strict upgrades, IMO, work better for dungeon crawlers than 'sidegrades'. Sidegrades should be in weapon class (rifles, shotguns, pistols, and melee should all be equally viable), not specific weapons.

Actually a sidegrade system encourages you to try (carrot system) all weapons and find one you like, maybe you find it the first time, but without trying the others how do you know you wont like them better?

Upgrade system will force people (stick system) to use multiple weapons, or simply be ineffectual.

At the end of the day the strict upgrade systems, with sidegrade classes, ends up with everyone using the same weapon in any one class, ie everyone eventually using the same rifle, shotgun, pistol and melee weapon.

Personally I wouldnt want to see everyone using the same loadout of (as an example) hek/gorgon, lex and scindo, simply because they are the highest tier (ie. percieved to be the best weapon for a class) and percieved to be the best or are the best effectual weapons for a class.

Honestly having a team of 4 (or more if they add larger grouping later) using all the same weapons would be rather bland.

Clearly a system that incentifies people to try other weapons is better than forcing them to do so.

Edited May 15, 2013 by Loswaith

[Zeddypanda]

I don't get it.

 

Making higher-tier versions of existing weapons is what mods do.

[BadAimbot]

I like being able to choose to use a weapon I like. I like the STRUN and if I was forced to upgrade to the HEK I would not be happy. Sure, you could just have the higher-end weapons work similarly to earlier versions, but then the earlier weapons are basically inferior versions of later ones for no reason other than to make us make new weapons.

[Xylia]

I like being able to choose to use a weapon I like. I like the STRUN and if I was forced to upgrade to the HEK I would not be happy. Sure, you could just have the higher-end weapons work similarly to earlier versions, but then the earlier weapons are basically inferior versions of later ones for no reason other than to make us make new weapons.

^^

This.

 

Nobody wants to be forced into a set of weapons, or worse, be forced to upgrade their weapons for no reason other than "your weapons are outdated".

 

There is always going to be those "Common" weapons you see most people having... those glaives, scindos, fragors, heks, etc... but you do see players with a Paris, players with the smaller swords, I saw a few boltors running around, etc.

 

It is nice to see variety.

 

If we had a world where everybody had the Hek or the Gorgon, Glaive or Scindo and everybody used a Kraken or Bronco, that would be boring. We want variety. If you don't have a variety and you've got everybody using one or the other, then there's something wrong with the game and it needs adjusting.

[-Vondred-]

I simply can't get in to this thread because the OP has yet to agree completely with anyone when they make points -- finding ways to negate opinions with his own because it's not exactly apart of his 'perfect' idea.

 

I'm sorry op, but this is a community-esque game, and if you want this idea to be more likely, then you have to give in to the idea that your idea is going to be modified or changed, based on the opinions of others.

 

With that said, I agree with BadAimbot.

 

 

 

I like being able to choose to use a weapon I like. I like the STRUN and if I was forced to upgrade to the HEK I would not be happy. Sure, you could just have the higher-end weapons work similarly to earlier versions, but then the earlier weapons are basically inferior versions of later ones for no reason other than to make us make new weapons.

[MJ12]

I simply can't get in to this thread because the OP has yet to agree completely with anyone when they make points -- finding ways to negate opinions with his own because it's not exactly apart of his 'perfect' idea.

 

I'm sorry op, but this is a community-esque game, and if you want this idea to be more likely, then you have to give in to the idea that your idea is going to be modified or changed, based on the opinions of others.

 

With that said, I agree with BadAimbot.

This is a really minority opinion to be honest and I have zero expectation it'll be implemented even if I think it's a net benefit to the game to have actually imbalanced weapons to some degree.

Also, on upgraded weapons vs sidegrades:

Viper vs Furis, Kraken vs Sicarus. Basically one upgrades the other. Viper has higher damage, RoF, reload, and accuracy at the tiny cost of a smaller mag. Kraken is more ammo-efficient, has an effectively larger magazine, and deals more damage.

There's also Bolto vs Akbolto, the akimbos in general, the Hek and Strun (still!), the Braton and Grakata, and so on.

This actually more or less works, the game has obvious weapons tiers even now and it actually works out okay. I'm mostly saying make that official and also cconcede that you will end up with tiered weapons.

[sylothix]

I believe the main reason that the game has side-grades instead of upgrades is due to potatoes. If other items were simply better than their predecessor  then what is the point of buying them with platinum or spending Orokin Catalysts on them? It would simply be a waste and people would just hoard their potatoes for the endgame stuff which would not be that beneficial for DE in terms of making money (I think).

[MJ12]

I believe the main reason that the game has side-grades instead of upgrades is due to potatoes. If other items were simply better than their predecessor  then what is the point of buying them with platinum or spending Orokin Catalysts on them? It would simply be a waste and people would just hoard their potatoes for the endgame stuff which would not be that beneficial for DE in terms of making money (I think).

 

That is an interesting line of thought, but I think you get a similar phenomena anyways now, where most people just potato everything they really want and everything else is basically gravy.

[_Rue_]

Well, unless you want everyone to have the same load out...

 

Take shotguns. Once you get the heck, will you use anything else?

 

Consider rifles, You have a lot of rilfes and a lot of different uses for em. I can't just pick one and  say this is the best. We have gorgons and sniprtrons and Paris and bratons which give the game a nice variety It allows varying play styles to exist and flourish. Throw in the mod system and you've got a winner. :)

 

PS

Hek needs a brother/sister.

[Carcharias]

This is an interesting point, but with the mod system in this game the "side grade " makes perfect sense. It is different but the point is you can choose your favorite weapon and make it your main if you want it to be. I just finished getting the Grakata to 30 and switched back to my mk1 to finish it out as I had left it as 28. I realized that going back to the very first gun in the game with better mods made the mk1 pretty bad &#!. The upgrading in this game it totally up to you and the mods you choose. Personally with the same mods I think the mk1 is way better than the Grakata just because you can engage longer, and you don't run out of ammo nearly as fast. On the table these two guns offer about the same over all DPS (damage per shot vs damage per mag vs reload time vs accuracy ect) Which one is an upgrade? Whichever one has the better mods. Just about any weapon can be an upgrade or down grade with the right or wrong mods.