Tonkor Balancing (Nerf) discussion..

[WARLOCKE]

20 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

You're right I shouldn't stoop to your level.

What you mean is your preferences should be how the game is developed. Nevermind, how the rest of us is impacted.

If it isn't kosher by you, it should be removed.

I think I understand your stance enough.

The tonkor is nothing more than a crutch. You know it, I know it. The thing is,a crutch should be identified by the developers and removed asap for the health of the game. Most developers know this and there are many videos on the negative impact of player crutchs done by industry professionals. The tonkor is even worse in that its available early in a players game life and allows them to do things they should not be doing at that level of play. 

You keep pulling the "fun" card. And that card is toxic. As ive said before in this post, fun is relative in that its not something easily measured. Some players think its "fun" to cheat and rob other players, they think its "fun" to troll and insult. By your gauge, thats ok. Because its fun. Damn the game and everyone in it as long as IM having fun. And I think thats what Brsrkr Is trying to impart to you. The tonkor ruins the game for everyone not using it. Its like taking a well built banshee to draco using the sound quake augment. Everything dies at the spawn points or the same could be said of pwr str mirage using the disco ball of doom. Sure its fun for those players, but what about the other three left to twiddle their thumbs?

But I go a step further than many on this thread do. I say AoE itself is far to strong be it explosive, CC or frame powers. The tonkor is just the poster child for this ideology.

[Currilicious]

1 minute ago, WARLOCKE said:

The tonkor is nothing more than a crutch. You know it, I know it. The thing is,a crutch should be identified by the developers and removed asap for the health of the game. Most developers know this and there are many videos on the negative impact of player crutchs done by industry professionals. The tonkor is even worse in that its available early in a players game life and allows them to do things they should not be doing at that level of play. 

You keep pulling the "fun" card. And that card is toxic. As ive said before in this post, fun is relative in that its not something easily measured. Some players think its "fun" to cheat and rob other players, they think its "fun" to troll and insult. By your gauge, thats ok. Because its fun. Damn the game and everyone in it as long as IM having fun. And I think thats what Brsrkr Is trying to impart to you. The tonkor ruins the game for everyone not using it. Its like taking a well built banshee to draco using the sound quake augment. Everything dies at the spawn points or the same could be said of pwr str mirage using the disco ball of doom. Sure its fun for those players, but what about the other three left to twiddle their thumbs?

But I go a step further than many on this thread do. I say AoE itself is far to strong be it explosive, CC or frame powers. The tonkor is just the poster child for this ideology.

First of all how do you define trolling by Tonkor? Unless you take offense to people blowing up your mobs, I can't see that happening.

And, I think how others derive fun from their games is none of your business. Or mine for that matter. I cannot pretend to know what's best for other people. Much less decide unilaterally to limit their game experience because I have take issue with something.

You feelings on game mechanics are not wrong. Neither are people who enjoy those mechanics.

Hence, my idea was always to let players of similar preferences group up.

You get to host a game, you get to filter out weapons or frames you do not want to play with. As to the details on how this would be implemented I really can't say.

At the end of the day, I would prefer an amicable solution that minimizes the impact on players that have no say in the matter.

[TheBrsrkr]

8 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

The health and longevity of the game will be a moot point when the game is made unfun due to nerfs.

You act as if we don't have 200+ weapons that can take the Tonkor's place to some degree or the other. 

 

9 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

Hence the selfish, hypocritical self-entitlement I'm talking about.

You act as if whether my opinion matters either, which it doesn't. How you feel about it in no way affects what it does. What it does is make it harder for everyone else besides the Tonkor player to do what they enjoy, which is killing enemies. It's ability to do that must be reduced. Why? Because one player having a negative effect on another is not fair to the first player. You thinking that it should be left alone become you like it is selfish for this reason. 

 

18 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

.When you have an issue with game mechanics you go up in arms about it. Despite various solutions that do not impact others negatively, you prefer a "solution" that would suit your preferences totally even at the expense of others. And thus, inflicting the same grievances unto others.

When I have an issue with game mechanics, I talk about game mechanics. I don't talk about how I feel about it, because how I feel about it has nothing to do with game mechanics. 

Let's look at your suggestion, and look at mine, and compare. 

The problem is that players are negatively affected by a broken and overpowered weapon. Your suggestion was to introduce a system that filters out launcher users so that no one has to play with them. 

Does this solution solve the issues involved? Let's see. 

 

Will the Tonkor still be overpowered? Yes because it's strength will not be affected in any way whatsoever. 

 

Will players still be negatively affected by the Tonkor? Yes, to a lesser extent. Since no launcher can compete with the Tonkor, launcher players are still affected by it. This decentivizes launchers as a whole as a choice, since no one wants the Tonkor in their match, and players would otherwise be inconvenienced by those using the launcher in random public games and therefore denying them a squad, since it only takes one to lock you out of the entire squad. Don't forget, you're punishing other players for the choice of avoiding a broken weapon. 

 

Are the developers wasting significantly more time creating this system? Yes. This mission affects matchmaking, UI, your current profile and current status. All of these have to be taken into account at all times during your play,until a mission is started, where they can just log you and forget. This requires several teams working together to produce an entirely new and invasive system which so far has solved no problems. 

 

Will the Tonkor stop invalidating content? No, because it's strength is not affected. 

 

Now, my suggestion is to reduce the effectiveness of the Tonkor. Let's have a look at that. 

Will the weapon still be overpowered? Obviously not. 

Will the Tonkor still invalidate content? No, since it's not overpowered anymore. 

Will other people still be negatively affected by the Tonkor? No, because it would be comparable to any other weapon and any other launcher in the game. It will affect them the same as every other weapon does. 

Will the developers waste a lot of time with this method? No. Nerfing a weapon takes about 2 weeks if past nerfs are anything to go by, and is really just adjusting the numbers and testing the weapon until the team is satisfied. 

 

Note how nowhere in there "will people like it was mentioned, since it has nothing to do with weapon balance. Even if it was a yes for your method and a no for mine, how many other points are there? 

59 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

.To which, I would say, neither do I care for your disdain for anything other than your own wants.

Good, I don't expect you to care about what I feel about it. But pardon me if I call you out on your crap. 

 

1 hour ago, Currilicious said:

Sure, if you get to decide what gets removed and what stays, but you don't.

So live with it.

Do you not understand how forums work? 

[Currilicious]

24 minutes ago, TheBrsrkr said:

You act as if we don't have 200+ weapons that can take the Tonkor's place to some degree or the other. 

 

You act as if whether my opinion matters either, which it doesn't. How you feel about it in no way affects what it does. What it does is make it harder for everyone else besides the Tonkor player to do what they enjoy, which is killing enemies. It's ability to do that must be reduced. Why? Because one player having a negative effect on another is not fair to the first player. You thinking that it should be left alone become you like it is selfish for this reason. 

 

Hey, you have a problem with it. Not me. You want a change and so the onus lies on you to convince the community this is good. Especially, if you want to do so at some of our expense.

And, time and time again, you have ardently pointed out that people with differing sentiments than yours does not matter.

Here let me remind you:

1 hour ago, TheBrsrkr said:

Oh no, I know how you'll be impacted. Your overpowered flavor of the day will not be overpowered anymore, and you'll move on because it's not overpowered. Not because you like the mechanics of the weapon, because you like the excessive damage the weapon does. That's all that matters to you. You like being OP. I just don't care. How you feel about it is irrelevant.

 

24 minutes ago, TheBrsrkr said:

 

When I have an issue with game mechanics, I talk about game mechanics. I don't talk about how I feel about it, because how I feel about it has nothing to do with game mechanics. 

 

Let's look at your suggestion, and look at mine, and compare. 

The problem is that players are negatively affected by a broken and overpowered weapon. Your suggestion was to introduce a system that filters out launcher users so that no one has to play with them. 

Will the Tonkor still be overpowered? Yes because it's strength will not be affected in any way whatsoever. 

That's the thing. A solution that does not hurt anyone's game.

Did it occur to you that there are players that like the game because they can be overpowered?

Or is that illegal too in your eyes?

 

24 minutes ago, TheBrsrkr said:

Will players still be negatively affected by the Tonkor? Yes, to a lesser extent. Since no launcher can compete with the Tonkor, launcher players are still affected by it. This decentivizes launchers as a whole as a choice, since no one wants the Tonkor in their match, and players would otherwise be inconvenienced by those using the launcher in random public games and therefore denying them a squad, since it only takes one to lock you out of the entire squad. Don't forget, you're punishing other players for the choice of avoiding a broken weapon. 

Which I've said, if the others feel neglected they should be buffed instead.

So the question is, first you have issues with people clearing your mobs? And now you have issues with people clearing your mobs with Tonkor only?

I can't say I follow your reasoning here. It changes. And " Don't forget, you're punishing other players for the choice of avoiding a broken weapon" makes no sense.

 

24 minutes ago, TheBrsrkr said:

Will the Tonkor stop invalidating content? No, because it's strength is not affected. 

What does it matter to you if casual Jim wants to wipe mobs everyday?

 

24 minutes ago, TheBrsrkr said:

Now, my suggestion is to reduce the effectiveness of the Tonkor. Let's have a look at that. 

Will the weapon still be overpowered? Obviously not. 

Will the Tonkor still invalidate content? No, since it's not overpowered anymore. 

Will other people still be negatively affected by the Tonkor? No, because it would be comparable to any other weapon and any other launcher in the game. It will affect them the same as every other weapon does. 

Will the developers waste a lot of time with this method? No. Nerfing a weapon takes about 2 weeks if past nerfs are anything to go by, and is really just adjusting the numbers and testing the weapon until the team is satisfied. 

 

Note how nowhere in there "will people like it was mentioned, since it has nothing to do with weapon balance. Even if it was a yes for your method and a no for mine, how many other points are there? 

Good, I don't expect you to care about what I feel about it. But pardon me if I call you out on your crap. 

 

Do you not understand how forums work? 

You are painting a pretty picture here without even considering that there are players different from yourself. People that prefer to be overpowered and prefer to wipe mobs. This is why they are playing Warframe and not Dark Souls.

Since you want this game to be changed to gravitate towards your preferences at some of our expense, we are bad for disagreeing with you?

So yeah, I guess to you, the forums should work one way and not any other way.

 

Edited May 14, 2016 by Currilicious

[TheBrsrkr]

2 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

Hey, you have a problem with it. Not me. You want a change and so the onus lies on you to convince the community this is good. Especially, if you want to do so at some of our expense.

And I have outlined why it must be changed multiple times. 

 

3 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

And, time and time again, you have ardently pointed out that people with differing sentiments than yours does not matter.

People who believe that their fun is more important than anyone else's fun, the health and longevity of the game, and the content the developers have created have no place in any discussion, much less this one. As you time and time again have ignored. You quoted it and I'll say it again,  I don't care of you're don't like it, because it's not relevant. You liking the Tonkor  means nothing. This is not a discussion about whether you like it, it's a discussion on whether it is balanced or not, and whether the game should support its broken state. Your opinion on the weapon  does not affect game balance or mechanics, and is therefore irrelevant. If you think that you,  personally,  are more important than other players, you are wrong. 

 

8 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

:That's the thing. A solution that does not hurt anyone's game.

I literally outline how it affects people's games. Did you forget how to read? 

 

34 minutes ago, TheBrsrkr said:

Will the Tonkor still be overpowered? Yes because it's strength will not be affected in any way whatsoever. 

Will players still be negatively affected by the Tonkor? Yes, to a lesser extent. Since no launcher can compete with the Tonkor, launcher players are still affected by it. This decentivizes launchers as a whole as a choice, since no one wants the Tonkor in their match, and players would otherwise be inconvenienced by those using the launcher in random public games and therefore denying them a squad, since it only takes one to lock you out of the entire squad. Don't forget, you're punishing other players for the choice of avoiding a broken weapon. 

Are the developers wasting significantly more time creating this system? Yes. This mission affects matchmaking, UI, your current profile and current status. All of these have to be taken into account at all times during your play,until a mission is started, where they can just log you and forget. This requires several teams working together to produce an entirely new and invasive system which so far has solved no problems. 

Will the Tonkor stop invalidating content? No, because it's strength is not affected. 

This is not a solution because it doesn't solve any problems,and adds even more problems to matchmaking. If you're going to comment on my post at least finish reading it. 

 

15 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

Did it occur to you that there are players that like the game because they can be overpowered?

Yes. Did it occur to you that being overpowered is bad for a game in many different ways, and that if you only like the weapon because it's overpowered, you don't really like the weapon  at all? Because it did to me. And I told you why. The players who like to be overpowered should not come at the expense of the players who like to be able to play the damn game. 

 

20 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

Which I've said, if the others feel neglected they should be buffed instead.

We already went over why buffing everything to be overpowered is a waste of development time and resources when the same result can be achieved by nerfing one weapon to be like all the other balanced weapons and call it a day. When you raise the standard for power, everything the power has to face must be raised as well. 

On the chart I have here:

Instead of bringing one single point up into the channel, you want to bring the entire thing down to meet the point. That is a ridiculous statement to make, and no one should take it seriously. 

28 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

.So the question is, first you have issues with people clearing your mobs? And now you have issues with people clearing your mobs with Tonkor only

The Tonkor is the only launcher that is OP, yet in your system you lumped all launchers together. So launcher players are limited in their matchmaking for no other reason than the Tonkor is a launcher, which has caused death by association to this weapon type. Meanwhile, players with launchers STILL have to deal with the Tonkor preventing them from playing, since they're using launchers themselves. You know who isn't affected at all? Those who use the Tonkor, since it's still overpowered and they can do anything they like anyway. 

35 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

I  can't say I follow your reasoning here. It changes. And " Don't forget, you're punishing other players for the choice of avoiding a broken weapon" makes no sense.

Launcher players are unfairly given bad matchmaking because they're grouped with the Tonkor. The people excluding launchers have less matchups to play the game with because of the Tonkor. Anyone inconvenienced by this system has to blame the Tonkor. These are all things players would be forced to put up with of they wanted to play the game without a broken weapon preventing them from doing it anyway, punishing them for no other reason than the Tonkor existing. That is why it fails as a system. 

 

42 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

What does it matter to you if casual Jim wants to wipe mobs everyday?

If casual Jim wants to wipe mobs all the time, he can do it in Mercury with a Mk-1 Braton modded out, nit the upper echelons of where the game is balanced with everyone else trying to play around him. If OP things don't get nerfed, the things they face get buffed to face them and only them. Everything else might as well not be there for all the good they do. That's why powercreep is bad; it makes older content irrelevant, therefore invalidating all the  work both the developers and the people who have bought and upgraded them have done. 

 

48 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

You are painting a pretty picture here without even considering that there are players different from yourself. 

I'm sure every player would prefer to play the game than to run around collecting loot while someone else plays for you. I like launchers. I like the Braton Prime. I don't like the Soma Prime. I don't like beam weapons. I like the Vay Hek, even though I'm not done upgrading it. I like melee. I like Hikou Prime and Telos Akbolto. I'm sure there are players that don't like any of the things I've listed here. Every player is different, but we all want the same things. We want to shoot a crap load of things, melt faces with powers and generally have a hell of a time doing it. And everyone has a way that they do it that is theirs, and they are content with it. Am I saying none of that matters? No, I'm saying all of that matters equally. So if one person is having fun making other people  suffer, I don't particularly care what they think. We are no longer taking about those people and their experiences when that happens. You matter as much as them, and they matter as much as you, so why even mention it? It's pointless. 

 

59 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

. People that prefer to be overpowered and prefer to wipe mobs. This is why they are playing Warframe and not Dark Souls.

These people are negatively affecting the game and the experience of other players by doing this. Other people don't like it. Who is more important? No one. Which is why I don't care if you like it or not. We are talking about mechanics, not preference. 

 

1 hour ago, Currilicious said:

Since you want this game to be changed to gravitate towards your preferences at some of our expense, we are bad for disagreeing with you?

Since you have a problem with other people enjoying the game while you are playing, yes. Everyone should be able to enjoy the game with everyone else. No one should break the game. The Tonkor has mechanics that hinder and prevent this. Therefore, the Tonkor must be changed. It's as simple as that. If you disagree, you should exlain how the Tonkor does not negatively affect other people or the game. Something you have no interest in. Therefore, your opinion is meaningless as it has nothing to do with the topic of discussion, as I stated was the effects that the Tonkor have on the game and the players. 

1 hour ago, Currilicious said:

So yeah, I guess to you, the forums should work one way and not any other way.

The question was, do you not know how forums work? Should I take this as a no? 

[Currilicious]

45 minutes ago, TheBrsrkr said:

 

People who believe that their fun is more important than anyone else's fun, the health and longevity of the game, and the content the developers have created have no place in any discussion, much less this one. As you time and time again have ignored. You quoted it and I'll say it again,  I don't care of you're don't like it, because it's not relevant. You liking the Tonkor  means nothing. This is not a discussion about whether you like it, it's a discussion on whether it is balanced or not, and whether the game should support its broken state. Your opinion on the weapon  does not affect game balance or mechanics, and is therefore irrelevant. If you think that you,  personally,  are more important than other players, you are wrong. 

 

So if you don't care about how your idea would impact me negatively, why should I care about how you have an issue? It would definitely suit me for things to remain unchanged, and you live with it.

 

45 minutes ago, TheBrsrkr said:

Yes. Did it occur to you that being overpowered is bad for a game in many different ways, and that if you only like the weapon because it's overpowered, you don't really like the weapon  at all? Because it did to me. And I told you why. The players who like to be overpowered should not come at the expense of the players who like to be able to play the damn game. 

No, I do not think players being overpowered, when compared to mobs, is a bad thing. And, I do not think players that want challenging content is bad. But what I do think is, having these two sets of players group up randomly is bad. You think you're being sidelined? Well, why don't you look at the mirror and see what your proposal achieves for players that do not share your rabid views.

 

45 minutes ago, TheBrsrkr said:

 

The Tonkor is the only launcher that is OP, yet in your system you lumped all launchers together. So launcher players are limited in their matchmaking for no other reason than the Tonkor is a launcher, which has caused death by association to this weapon type. Meanwhile, players with launchers STILL have to deal with the Tonkor preventing them from playing, since they're using launchers themselves. You know who isn't affected at all? Those who use the Tonkor, since it's still overpowered and they can do anything they like anyway. 

 

Launcher players are unfairly given bad matchmaking because they're grouped with the Tonkor. The people excluding launchers have less matchups to play the game with because of the Tonkor. Anyone inconvenienced by this system has to blame the Tonkor. These are all things players would be forced to put up with of they wanted to play the game without a broken weapon preventing them from doing it anyway, punishing them for no other reason than the Tonkor existing. That is why it fails as a system. 

 

Are you even playing the same game? My built Penta does just as well as Tonkor in terms of clearing up mobs. And, my Secura Penta needed less Forma to achieve that level of destruction too. And, it has a triggering mechanism to go boom, to boot.

Are you sure you're not just having beef with Tonkor players in general? It's starting to look like that.

 

45 minutes ago, TheBrsrkr said:

 

If casual Jim wants to wipe mobs all the time, he can do it in Mercury with a Mk-1 Braton modded out, nit the upper echelons of where the game is balanced with everyone else trying to play around him. If OP things don't get nerfed, the things they face get buffed to face them and only them. Everything else might as well not be there for all the good they do. That's why powercreep is bad; it makes older content irrelevant, therefore invalidating all the  work both the developers and the people who have bought and upgraded them have done. 

 

Oh so, not only do you have a problem with casual Jim blowing stuff up. You also want to control where casual Jim does his exploding works.

Do you know for a fact, that is how this game is designed? Do you also know you're insulting the people that actually made this game? How much experience do you have on game design or software development?

 

45 minutes ago, TheBrsrkr said:

 

I'm sure every player would prefer to play the game than to run around collecting loot while someone else plays for you. I like launchers. I like the Braton Prime. I don't like the Soma Prime. I don't like beam weapons. I like the Vay Hek, even though I'm not done upgrading it. I like melee. I like Hikou Prime and Telos Akbolto. I'm sure there are players that don't like any of the things I've listed here. Every player is different, but we all want the same things. We want to shoot a crap load of things, melt faces with powers and generally have a hell of a time doing it. And everyone has a way that they do it that is theirs, and they are content with it. Am I saying none of that matters? No, I'm saying all of that matters equally. So if one person is having fun making other people  suffer, I don't particularly care what they think. We are no longer taking about those people and their experiences when that happens. You matter as much as them, and they matter as much as you, so why even mention it? It's pointless. 

These people are negatively affecting the game and the experience of other players by doing this. Other people don't like it. Who is more important? No one. Which is why I don't care if you like it or not. We are talking about mechanics, not preference. 

 

Oh so now you see there are players with different preferences. And yet, somehow you feel it is not enough to have a tool to seek out like minded players to group with. But you remain adamant with a blanket move across the board, and all that despite it being detrimental to casual Jim, he should take it like a champ.

I don't think I agree with your "logic" here. Why don't you wake up and smell what you're shoveling.

 

45 minutes ago, TheBrsrkr said:

 

Since you have a problem with other people enjoying the game while you are playing, yes. Everyone should be able to enjoy the game with everyone else. No one should break the game. The Tonkor has mechanics that hinder and prevent this. Therefore, the Tonkor must be changed. It's as simple as that. If you disagree, you should exlain how the Tonkor does not negatively affect other people or the game. Something you have no interest in. Therefore, your opinion is meaningless as it has nothing to do with the topic of discussion, as I stated was the effects that the Tonkor have on the game and the players. 

 

The question was, do you not know how forums work? Should I take this as a no? 

Simple. I have no problems with the Tonkor. It does not impact me in a bad way, even if another person in my party has it hence I see no need for its change. I take no issue with other people using it to wipe mobs if they see fit. I don't think it is my place to judge how other people play their game. This has always been my stance.

Now then, the weapon Tonkor is no different than a Penta in terms of destructive power when it's fully decked out. I know because I have both of these fitted with all the mods I want in them. The fact that you are picking on one but not the other is something I think lacks consistency in view of your grievances.

So, since you have a problem with explosive weapons clearing your mobs, there are two options I can think of:

1. Introduce game creation options where you choose which weapon/frame to allow into your game. This has does not negatively impact anyone involved.

2. Nerf/neuter explosive weapons from the game to make them as unattractive as possible. This impacts everyone involved, some positively some negatively.

I am for #1 because it does not hurt anyone and lets like minded people for a group.

You OTOH is hellbent on #2 which will hurt the game experience of other people. And, I note that you have indignantly stated a lot of times, you don't care if it did.

And since you do not care about those with opposing views, what are you doing in the forums anyway?

 

Edited May 14, 2016 by Currilicious

[kilerskull]

choo choo tonka truck coming thru!!

[TheBrsrkr]

17 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

So if you don't care about how your idea would impact me negatively, why should I care about how you have an issue? 

Because you are not more important than game mechanics, game balance or any other player. That is what we are discussing, not your or my enjoyment. Of I am discussing wine flavors, your opinion on car dealerships is worthless to me and anyone else in the discussion, because we are not talking about the same things. Same thing here. 

 

22 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

It would definitely suit me for things to remain unchanged, and you live with it.

It would suit everyone else better that things change and you live with it. Ergo.... 

 

24 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

No, I do not think players being overpowered, when compared to mobs, is a bad thing. 

In spite of several arguments from me and others why it is a bad thing, which you refuse to discuss. 

 

25 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

 And, I do not think players that want challenging content is bad. But what I do think is, having these two sets of players group up randomly is bad. 

And you solve this you would force everyone to use a system that excludes one group from another playing the same content, not benefiting either side and not fixing any issues there were in the first place, and adding a host of others. 

 

34 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

. You think you're being sidelined? Well, why don't you look at the mirror and see what your proposal achieves for players that do not share your rabid views.

It's everyone else that benefits from this, while they lose nothing but the ability to trivialize the content the developers created. Whether they like it or not is a completely separate issue from this discussion. The two do not intersect at any point,because your preferences have no effect on game balance or mechanics. 

 

47 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

Are you even playing the same game? My built Penta does just as well as Tonkor in terms of clearing up mobs. And, my Secura Penta needed less Forma to achieve that level of destruction too. And, it has a triggering mechanism to go boom, to boot.

It also has  slower travel time, a smaller blast radius, much less damage, less reserve ammo and you have to detonate each shot as you fire it to achieve anything  outside of trapping. And you can kill yourself. Are you seriously suggesting that The Penta is as OP as the Tonkor, when it has all of the downsides of the other launchers that the Tonkor doesn't? You must be joking. 

 

1 hour ago, Currilicious said:

Are you sure you're not just having beef with Tonkor players in general? It's starting to look like that.

Seems more like you're grasping at straws to me. 

 

1 hour ago, Currilicious said:

Oh so, not only do you have a problem with casual Jim blowing stuff up. You also want to control where casual Jim does his exploding works.

If Jim wants to explode things at high levels, he's going to have to do it with a balanced launcher. If he doesn't, he's going to make the game worse for everyone, including himself, as the game tries to account for his obscene amounts of power in the only way obscene amounts of power can be:hard caps on actions. If he had any kind of foresight or rational thought he would go where anything is OP to be OP. The only difference is the numbers above their heads. Jim asks some pretty dumb questions. 

 

1 hour ago, Currilicious said:

.Do you know for a fact, that is how this game is designed? Do you also know you're insulting the people that actually made this game? How much experience do you have on game design or software development?

Are we gonna start this now? You don't need a degree in computer science to Google search, and read anything related to the topic. There's literal thousands of articles, blogs, books and videos about game balance. You'd think I'd learn something in the past 2 years. Even if I didn't, so bloody what? Suddenly everything I've said is wrong because I'm not a game developer myself? What would be the point of a feedback forum then? These are definitions of terms, not stuff I just made up. If you'd bother to learn what these things mean and how they affect and have affected the game so far, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. 

 

1 hour ago, Currilicious said:

Oh so now you see there are players with different preferences. And yet, somehow you feel it is not enough to have a tool to seek out like minded players to group with. But you remain adamant with a blanket move across the board, and all that despite it being detrimental to casual Jim, he should take it like a champ.

If Jim matters as much as Erik here, and Erik wants it nerfed. Now what? We've been over before, twice, why your suggested solution does not work, and how my solution actually solves the issues. We've also been over why your preference is irrelevant to the conversation about game balance and mechanics, but at this point you're just ranting for ranting's sake. 

 

1 hour ago, Currilicious said:

.I don't think I agree with your "logic" here. Why don't you wake up and smell what you're shoveling.

You don't have an argument against it, but you say it's wrong, so it's wrong. I get it. 

 

1 hour ago, Currilicious said:

.Simple. I have no problems with the Tonkor. It does not impact me in a bad way, even if another person in my party has it hence I see no need for its change. I take no issue with other people using it to wipe mobs if they see fit. I don't think it is my place to judge how other people play their game. This has always been my stance.

Cool. You're wrong though. If you have to ask why, you haven't been reading. 

 

1 hour ago, Currilicious said:

.Now then, the weapon Tonkor is no different than a Penta in terms of destructive power when it's fully decked out. 

Sure, if you play on Mercury. 

1 hour ago, Currilicious said:

. I know because I have both of these fitted with all the mods I want in them. The fact that you are picking on one but not the other is something I think lacks consistency in view of your grievances.

Do you understand how math works? The Tonkor does 25 less base damage than the Penta, for 25% more crit and 0.5x better crit multiplier. In a larger blast radius, with twice the total ammo. Even if you have the same mods in both, the Tonkor will outperform the Penta wherever damage actually matters because of it's crit chance and multiplier,faster reload and launch, and less control fiddling to get an explosion. There's hyperbole, then there's outright lying,  man. 

 

2 hours ago, Currilicious said:

.So, since you have a problem with explosive weapons clearing your mobs, there are two options I can think of:

1. Introduce game creation options where you choose which weapon/frame to allow into your game. This has does not negatively impact anyone involved.

Basically ignore the problem while never solving anything. We've been over this. It'll still be OP. It will still break the game. It's influence on this system will still negatively affect other players, and unfairly punish the users of other launchers, and make the DEVs waste time and resources on implementing a game wide system that doesn't work. Figure out something else. 

 

2 hours ago, Currilicious said:

.2. Nerf/neuter explosive weapons from the game to make them as unattractive as possible. This impacts everyone involved, some positively some negatively.

That's a nice twist of my words there, saying explosives instead of just the Tonkor. You could feed an underdeveloped country's livestock with all that straw. As for impact, it's negative for Tonkor players, and positive for literally everyone else, because game balance and mechanics are not affected by personal preference. How many more times do I have to say it?

 

2 hours ago, Currilicious said:

?.I am for #1 because it does not hurt anyone and lets like minded people for a group.

It does negatively affect many people involved, as we've discussed, and it does not solve any issue brought up. 

 

2 hours ago, Currilicious said:

.You OTOH is hellbent on #2 which will hurt the game experience of other people. And, I note that you have indignantly stated a lot of times, you don't care if it did.

Because your personal preference does not affect game balance or mechanics. If your feelings are hurt when DE fixes the game, why should I care? They're fixing the game. The same thing happened with Coptering, the same thing happened with Damage 2.0,and the same thing happened with mod slots being reduced with abilities becoming inherent. All of these were improvements to the game that negatively affected people. Those people didn't matter, because, and I'll say it again, game balance has nothing to do with personal preferences. 

 

2 hours ago, Currilicious said:

.And since you do not care about those with opposing views, what are you doing in the forums anyway?

I care about people with opposing views when those opposing views make sense and aren't already acknowledged 15 times in separate threads and are actually on topic. I don't care otherwise. 

[Currilicious]

36 minutes ago, TheBrsrkr said:

Because you are not more important than game mechanics, game balance or any other player. That is what we are discussing, not your or my enjoyment. Of I am discussing wine flavors, your opinion on car dealerships is worthless to me and anyone else in the discussion, because we are not talking about the same things. Same thing here. 

 

It would suit everyone else better that things change and you live with it. Ergo.... 

 

Right so anything that's not in line with your views on "game mechanics, game balance or any other player" means it's less important. Oh and you speak for everyone. Got it.

 

36 minutes ago, TheBrsrkr said:

And you solve this you would force everyone to use a system that excludes one group from another playing the same content, not benefiting either side and not fixing any issues there were in the first place, and adding a host of others. 

Yeah I'm sure a unilateral blanket nerf is not "force everyone to use a system that excludes one group", again, because you said so.

 

36 minutes ago, TheBrsrkr said:

It's everyone else that benefits from this, while they lose nothing but the ability to trivialize the content the developers created. Whether they like it or not is a completely separate issue from this discussion. The two do not intersect at any point,because your preferences have no effect on game balance or mechanics. 

Oh so according to you anyone that does not enjoy the game the same way is bad and that has to end no matter what. Last I checked this is a game not a religious fundamentalist group.

 

36 minutes ago, TheBrsrkr said:

It also has  slower travel time, a smaller blast radius, much less damage, less reserve ammo and you have to detonate each shot as you fire it to achieve anything  outside of trapping. And you can kill yourself. Are you seriously suggesting that The Penta is as OP as the Tonkor, when it has all of the downsides of the other launchers that the Tonkor doesn't? You must be joking. 

 

Seems more like you're grasping at straws to me. 

And here is why you don't understand how balance works. One thing is a triggerable on-demand explosive, the other a shoot and hope you hit kinda thing. But of course, to you it's just the numbers that matters, the rest is just irrelevant or you don't care. Or maybe you like straws.

 

36 minutes ago, TheBrsrkr said:

 

If Jim wants to explode things at high levels, he's going to have to do it with a balanced launcher. If he doesn't, he's going to make the game worse for everyone, including himself, as the game tries to account for his obscene amounts of power in the only way obscene amounts of power can be:hard caps on actions. If he had any kind of foresight or rational thought he would go where anything is OP to be OP. The only difference is the numbers above their heads. Jim asks some pretty dumb questions. 

 

Oh so you get to decide how everyone play their game too. Maybe you should write a book to educate the community on the "any kind of foresight or rational thought".

 

36 minutes ago, TheBrsrkr said:

Are we gonna start this now? You don't need a degree in computer science to Google search, and read anything related to the topic. There's literal thousands of articles, blogs, books and videos about game balance. You'd think I'd learn something in the past 2 years. Even if I didn't, so bloody what? Suddenly everything I've said is wrong because I'm not a game developer myself? What would be the point of a feedback forum then? These are definitions of terms, not stuff I just made up. If you'd bother to learn what these things mean and how they affect and have affected the game so far, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. 

Oh right. So google warrior trumps game developers that actually make a living with that discipline. Good to know.

 

36 minutes ago, TheBrsrkr said:

If Jim matters as much as Erik here, and Erik wants it nerfed. Now what? We've been over before, twice, why your suggested solution does not work, and how my solution actually solves the issues. We've also been over why your preference is irrelevant to the conversation about game balance and mechanics, but at this point you're just ranting for ranting's sake. 

No no, I understand, only you matter. You don't care if Jim has to lose a leg for your sake. There's all there is. I understand.

 

36 minutes ago, TheBrsrkr said:

You don't have an argument against it, but you say it's wrong, so it's wrong. I get it. 

 

Cool. You're wrong though. If you have to ask why, you haven't been reading.

Yeah everyone that have different preferences must be backed up with facts that's agreeable by you otherwise it's wrong. No worries there.

 

36 minutes ago, TheBrsrkr said:

Sure, if you play on Mercury. 

Do you understand how math works? The Tonkor does 25 less base damage than the Penta, for 25% more crit and 0.5x better crit multiplier. In a larger blast radius, with twice the total ammo. Even if you have the same mods in both, the Tonkor will outperform the Penta wherever damage actually matters because of it's crit chance and multiplier,faster reload and launch, and less control fiddling to get an explosion. There's hyperbole, then there's outright lying,  man. 

 

Oh so now you are saying Penta is only good for Mercury and I'm the one on hyperhole?

And, to you a buff for Penta is not good, only a nerf to Tonkor would do. Surely that's not straw grasping, nope.

 

36 minutes ago, TheBrsrkr said:

Basically ignore the problem while never solving anything. We've been over this. It'll still be OP. It will still break the game. It's influence on this system will still negatively affect other players, and unfairly punish the users of other launchers, and make the DEVs waste time and resources on implementing a game wide system that doesn't work. Figure out something else. 

And ignoring counter arguments plus picking the extreme measure with the most collateral damage will surely solve the problem. Yup sure do.

 

36 minutes ago, TheBrsrkr said:

Basically ignore the problem while never solving anything. We've been over this. It'll still be OP. It will still break the game. It's influence on this system will still negatively affect other players, and unfairly punish the users of other launchers, and make the DEVs waste time and resources on implementing a game wide system that doesn't work. Figure out something else. 

Now, not only you decide how players play their game, you also have a say on the direction of the game development and how developers should use their resources. What's your role in DE again? Wait, I don't want to know.

 

36 minutes ago, TheBrsrkr said:

That's a nice twist of my words there, saying explosives instead of just the Tonkor. You could feed an underdeveloped country's livestock with all that straw. As for impact, it's negative for Tonkor players, and positive for literally everyone else, because game balance and mechanics are not affected by personal preference. How many more times do I have to say it?
 

Negative according to you not to me. And my gaming preferences are important to me. Since all of that is ignored by you, why should I be sympathetic to your issues when you insist on the most costly option on my part to address?

 

36 minutes ago, TheBrsrkr said:

Because your personal preference does not affect game balance or mechanics. If your feelings are hurt when DE fixes the game, why should I care? They're fixing the game. The same thing happened with Coptering, the same thing happened with Damage 2.0,and the same thing happened with mod slots being reduced with abilities becoming inherent. All of these were improvements to the game that negatively affected people. Those people didn't matter, because, and I'll say it again, game balance has nothing to do with personal preferences. 

Your personal beef with stuff being blown up in your game has nothing to do with me also. Then, why are you asking for a weapon that I may like to be nerfed?

But then again, most people don't matter to you. Because you're the most important. Amirite?

 

Edited May 15, 2016 by Currilicious

[-CdG-Zilchy]

Currilicious read this article: http://esportsedition.com/hearthstone/the-problem-of-power-creep-in-hearthstone/

The issue with sectioning launcher players like you're suggesting, is that the Tonkor's obscene damage remains untouched. There are 2 ways to deal with Powercreep, it can be nerfed or the ENTIRE game's challenge can be raised. The issue with the second option is that you're rendering every other weapon that isn't unbalanced, less useful and less effective. So in actual fact you're forcing EVERYONE to use the Tonkor. When I say nerfing, realistically all that is needed is to add self damage(which makes sense with a launcher and you stated you still like your Penta so I assume you don't mind this) and to remove Launcher AoE's causing an automatic headshot. Currently I fire the Tonkor and get a headshot aiming at their feet, which procs Argon Scope and my second shot does 200k+ damage. That is broken.

Now by making those changes to the Tonkor you not only make it a more skillful weapon to use since to headshot you will have to AIM for the head like you do with every normal weapon and you won't be able to do it from point blank range because you'll blow yourself up, just like you would using a real launcher. However, by simply sanctioning the Tonkor players into a separate invite group like you've suggested, the weapon remains untouched, it still melts everything with ease and DE are STILL forced to counter it by adding more armour and shields to the enemy, making it harder to use any other weapon in the game in higher level content, so effectively you're pigeon-holing every player into having the choice of using the Tonkor or failing the mission if they wish to play endgame levels of content.

These changes shouldn't affect you anyway since in your arguments above you have stated that your Penta can do just as much damage as the Tonkor. So go ahead and use the Penta.

Edited May 15, 2016 by Zilchy

[TheBrsrkr]

6 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

Right so anything that's not in line with your views on "game mechanics, game balance or any other player" means it's less important. Oh and you speak for everyone. Got it.

My "views" are the definition of these terms. If you'd bother to learn what they mean and how they are applied, you'd understand that. But no. You think that just because you feel that it's fun everything will work out. Programming is magic, right? 

 

9 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

.Yeah I'm sure a unilateral blanket nerf is not "force everyone to use a system that excludes one group", again, because you said so.

It's more 1% that I say so, and 99% there are 200 other weapons players can use besides the Tonkor that don't get in the way of players and are still fun to play with. Including launchers. Just not the Tonkor. 1 is lost so that 200 are gained. 

 

12 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

Oh so according to you anyone that does not enjoy the game the same way is bad and that has to end no matter what. Last I checked this is a game not a religious fundamentalist group.

According to me, if you haven't figured it out by now, your personal preference has nothing to do with game balance or mechanics, so I don't have to care about how you feel about the change. 

 

14 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

And here is why you don't understand how balance works.

I'll take hypocrisy for 500.

15 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

. One thing is a triggerable on-demand explosive, the other a shoot and hope you hit kinda thing. But of course, to you it's just the numbers that matters, the rest is just irrelevant or you don't care. Or maybe you like straws.?

One also does literally hundreds of thousands more damage than the other, has an aim guide, larger damage radius and faster reload. It also doesn't need to airburst to get the most damage out of it. Also you can't kill yourself with it, so you can get as close as you like so you don't miss. But of course, it's just the one aspect of the weapon  that's different that counts, and not all the aspects of the weapon put together that makes it good. That's why the Karak Wraith is better than a Soma Prime due to its base damage, right? 

 

21 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

.Oh so you get to decide how everyone play their game too. Maybe you should write a book to educate the community on the "any kind of foresight or rational thought".

I honestly don't know what part of personal preference has no effect on game balance or mechanics you don't understand. I'd you use an overpowered weapon too much for too long, the enemies will be changed to face it. These enemies will be able to match the insane power of whatever the weapon is, and nothing else will since they don't have the same power. Thus, you create a situation where NOT using the OP weapon is effectively punished. All this can be avoided by getting rid of the overpowered weapon  in the first place. 

 

26 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

Oh right. So google warrior trumps game developers that actually make a living with that discipline. Good to know.

No, person who actually bothers to learn about a game he likes trumps person who has nothing better than arguments of straw and wilful ignorance. 

 

28 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

No no, I understand, only you matter. You don't care if Jim has to lose a leg for your sake. There's all there is. I understand.

What a stupid comparison. Jim is having fun ruining everyone else's day. People step in to fix it, but that's just Jim having fun, right? If he's having fun, everyone else should just join groups without Jim, right? Except that it doesn't solve the problem that Jim is a freaking idiot, or that the game still has to deal with him. People associated with him are left out too just because they're associated with him. Everyone is forced to group around these people instead of with anyone like it's supposed to be. Is the problem solved? No. You just threw a blanket on it and pretend it's not there. It's still there. 

 

33 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

.Yeah everyone that have different preferences must be backed up with facts that's agreeable by you otherwise it's wrong. No worries there.

I literally specify that your personal preference has no effect on game balance and mechanics several times. It was in bold. You're just wasting your breath at this point. 

 

35 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

Oh so now you are saying Penta is only good for Mercury and I'm the one on hyperhole?

So you just read the first sentence, didn't you. I understand. No wait, I don't. Because that's stupid. 

If you're going to quote something, quote the part you're actually addressing please. I didn't say the Penta is only good on Mercury. Read again. Read it slower. Then read the rest of it. Math is hard, I know, but you can do it. 

39 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

?And, to you a buff for Penta is not good, only a nerf to Tonkor would do. Surely that's not straw grasping, nope

Do you even know what grasping at straws means? 

Whatever, how is buffing the Penta making the Tonkor less OP? It'll just make both of them OP, solving nothing. You're not making any sense. 

41 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

.And ignoring counter arguments plus picking the extreme measure with the most collateral damage will surely solve the problem. Yup sure do.

Your only counter argument was "it's better than nerfing!" when it isn't because it solved precisely none of the issues. 

 

43 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

Now, not only you decide how players play their game, you also have a say on the direction of the game development and how developers should use their resources. What's your role in DE again? Wait, I don't want to know.

I'll ask again, do you not understand how forums work? The entire point of the forums is player feedback on the development of the game. And bug reports. And even more stupidity in the form of you must be this qualified to comment. 

 

45 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

Negative according to you not to me. And my gaming preferences are important to me. 

Your personal preference has no effect on game balance or mechanics. 

 

47 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

. Since all of that is ignored by you, why should I be sympathetic to your issues when you insist on the most costly option on my part to address?

The most costly option in your opinion. It is the most efficient and least destructive method available to DE at the moment. Because this is one weapon, a self contained unit with its own mechanics, versus the balance of the entire game and it's systems. It's not me hating it vs you liking it. 

 

50 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

?Your personal beef with stuff being blown up in your game has nothing to do with me also. 

What is reading comprehension? My personal beef is me not being able to play because everything is dead. Where did I mention that,specifically? Where did I mention ME, TheBrsrkr, personally not being able to play the game with a Tonkor user as an argument? My personal preference has no bearing on game balance or mechanics. Which is why I didn't bring it up. Your beef seems to be that you like it, so it should be left alone. But this doesn't have any effect on game balance or mechanics either. Do you have no argument, unless you can argue a way that it doesn't affect game balance or mechanics in the way I said it does. 

 

55 minutes ago, Currilicious said:

But then again, most people don't matter to you. Because you're the most important. Amirite?

Again, people don't matter to me when they're discussing things that are not the same topic that I am discussing. This is what you are doing. I'm not talking about how you feel about the weapon. Read and understand. 

[WARLOCKE]

1 hour ago, Zilchy said:

Currilicious read this article: http://esportsedition.com/hearthstone/the-problem-of-power-creep-in-hearthstone/

The issue with sectioning launcher players like you're suggesting, is that the Tonkor's obscene damage remains untouched. There are 2 ways to deal with Powercreep, it can be nerfed or the ENTIRE game's challenge can be raised. The issue with the second option is that you're rendering every other weapon that isn't unbalanced, less useful and less effective. So in actual fact you're forcing EVERYONE to use the Tonkor. When I say nerfing, realistically all that is needed is to add self damage(which makes sense with a launcher and you stated you still like your Penta so I assume you don't mind this) and to remove Launcher AoE's causing an automatic headshot. Currently I fire the Tonkor and get a headshot aiming at their feet, which procs Argon Scope and my second shot does 200k+ damage. That is broken.

Now by making those changes to the Tonkor you not only make it a more skillful weapon to use since to headshot you will have to AIM for the head like you do with every normal weapon and you won't be able to do it from point blank range because you'll blow yourself up, just like you would using a real launcher. However, by simply sanctioning the Tonkor players into a separate invite group like you've suggested, the weapon remains untouched, it still melts everything with ease and DE are STILL forced to counter it by adding more armour and shields to the enemy, making it harder to use any other weapon in the game in higher level content, so effectively you're pigeon-holing every player into having the choice of using the Tonkor or failing the mission if they wish to play endgame levels of content.

These changes shouldn't affect you anyway since in your arguments above you have stated that your Penta can do just as much damage as the Tonkor. So go ahead and use the Penta.

I dont know about anyone else but im going to call this thread over and wash myself of these proceedings. Good work Zilchy.

Edited May 15, 2016 by WARLOCKE

[(PSN)Nukerxero123]

All of you just, put it to rest. Just go play the game and have fun. If you Tonkor gets nerfed. I hope not. If it does it's the devs telling us that go enjoy another weapon.

[(PSN)XxDarkyanxX]

52 minutes ago, WARLOCKE said:

I dont know about anyone else but im going to call this thread over and wash myself of these proceedings. Good work Zilchy.

Pretty sure the thread hit dead bottom a few pages ago.

But yeah, everyone can agree that Tonkor having no self-damage and auto-targetting headshots from any angle isn't really reasonnable.

[-CdG-Zilchy]

4 hours ago, WARLOCKE said:

I dont know about anyone else but im going to call this thread over and wash myself of these proceedings. Good work Zilchy.

Cheers mate

[(PSN)Akuma_Asura_]

On May 13, 2016 at 3:30 PM, (PS4)Akuma_Asura_ said:

If you guys a going to lynch the tonkor then synoid simulor better go with it 

 

[ElCorintio]

On 14/5/2016 at 3:04 AM, Magneu said:

Because not using something (spoiler: I have, five forma's worth) is indicative of not having a valid, fact-backed opinion. 

Claiming it doesn't need a nerf without backing up that claim is just a waste of time.

Go read the other thread on this. It has all the current arguments laid out over and over for your reading pleasure.

I had read a lot of this threads, and all of them are filled with people (The Nerf Patrol) complaining, or whinning, and occasianally you can find a real argument about the subject. 

And let me tell you, if this thread would had been created with the real idea of getting feedback to rebalance the weapon system, this thing wont be centered on the Tonkor, but the discussion should be about the general aspects that, in our opinion, would be a good idea to be revisited to fix the balance between the weapons (like the concept of self damage in all the weapons). Because center the discussion just about how the Tonkor may or not may be OP, is just a short sight discussion which only may lead us into whinning, flame wars, or nerfing ideas, instead of a better approach to the subject...

PS: English is not my first language, so, sorry about my grammar

[arch111]

Ok. So I am leveling my Tonkor now, at 12 now. I see this thread still going. And I am confused. 

Tonkor is pretty demanding to use well since if you miss it bounces away to whereever.

The clipsize is small and firerate slow.

Why the intense focus on this weapon when many other are complete room-clearers?

Synoid must be the best example, and the one weapon I saw discussed heavily before tonkor. 

 

[WARLOCKE]

24 minutes ago, arch111 said:

Ok. So I am leveling my Tonkor now, at 12 now. I see this thread still going. And I am confused. 

Tonkor is pretty demanding to use well since if you miss it bounces away to whereever.

The clipsize is small and firerate slow.

Why the intense focus on this weapon when many other are complete room-clearers?

Synoid must be the best example, and the one weapon I saw discussed heavily before tonkor. 

 

You need a few mods to break it. Argon scope ect. Also, many use it as a point blank cannon due to no self damage so dont have to aim.

[(PSN)inkdevil1]

It should be locked to MR15.NO point NERFING good weapons just because 95% of the other weapons are GARBAGE ,buff the trash is the only way to solve this so called unbalanced nonsense 

[arch111]

28 minutes ago, WARLOCKE said:

You need a few mods to break it. Argon scope ect. Also, many use it as a point blank cannon due to no self damage so dont have to aim.

So I need really good and hard to get mods to make it great? New players do not gave that.

As for the pointblank. A replacement for melee and shotgun?

Ok  i have to try that 0-range tactic.

[(PSN)AngelShur]

On 14 May 2016 at 6:26 PM, ludo3009 said:

Mr 18 requirement I agree with this

And nerf draco xp too. It's annoying to see people already mr21 after 750 hours played and like 3 different weapons really used in percentage.

Draco is already being reworked with a different spawn location every time, so no static location no more.

[Currilicious]

15 hours ago, TheBrsrkr said:

My "views" are the definition of these terms. If you'd bother to learn what they mean and how they are applied, you'd understand that. But no. You think that just because you feel that it's fun everything will work out. Programming is magic, right? 

 

It's more 1% that I say so, and 99% there are 200 other weapons players can use besides the Tonkor that don't get in the way of players and are still fun to play with. Including launchers. Just not the Tonkor. 1 is lost so that 200 are gained. 

 

According to me, if you haven't figured it out by now, your personal preference has nothing to do with game balance or mechanics, so I don't have to care about how you feel about the change. 

 

I'll take hypocrisy for 500.

One also does literally hundreds of thousands more damage than the other, has an aim guide, larger damage radius and faster reload. It also doesn't need to airburst to get the most damage out of it. Also you can't kill yourself with it, so you can get as close as you like so you don't miss. But of course, it's just the one aspect of the weapon  that's different that counts, and not all the aspects of the weapon put together that makes it good. That's why the Karak Wraith is better than a Soma Prime due to its base damage, right? 

 

I honestly don't know what part of personal preference has no effect on game balance or mechanics you don't understand. I'd you use an overpowered weapon too much for too long, the enemies will be changed to face it. These enemies will be able to match the insane power of whatever the weapon is, and nothing else will since they don't have the same power. Thus, you create a situation where NOT using the OP weapon is effectively punished. All this can be avoided by getting rid of the overpowered weapon  in the first place. 

 

No, person who actually bothers to learn about a game he likes trumps person who has nothing better than arguments of straw and wilful ignorance. 

 

What a stupid comparison. Jim is having fun ruining everyone else's day. People step in to fix it, but that's just Jim having fun, right? If he's having fun, everyone else should just join groups without Jim, right? Except that it doesn't solve the problem that Jim is a freaking idiot, or that the game still has to deal with him. People associated with him are left out too just because they're associated with him. Everyone is forced to group around these people instead of with anyone like it's supposed to be. Is the problem solved? No. You just threw a blanket on it and pretend it's not there. It's still there. 

 

I literally specify that your personal preference has no effect on game balance and mechanics several times. It was in bold. You're just wasting your breath at this point. 

 

So you just read the first sentence, didn't you. I understand. No wait, I don't. Because that's stupid. 

If you're going to quote something, quote the part you're actually addressing please. I didn't say the Penta is only good on Mercury. Read again. Read it slower. Then read the rest of it. Math is hard, I know, but you can do it. 

Do you even know what grasping at straws means? 

Whatever, how is buffing the Penta making the Tonkor less OP? It'll just make both of them OP, solving nothing. You're not making any sense. 

Your only counter argument was "it's better than nerfing!" when it isn't because it solved precisely none of the issues. 

 

I'll ask again, do you not understand how forums work? The entire point of the forums is player feedback on the development of the game. And bug reports. And even more stupidity in the form of you must be this qualified to comment. 

 

Your personal preference has no effect on game balance or mechanics. 

 

The most costly option in your opinion. It is the most efficient and least destructive method available to DE at the moment. Because this is one weapon, a self contained unit with its own mechanics, versus the balance of the entire game and it's systems. It's not me hating it vs you liking it. 

 

What is reading comprehension? My personal beef is me not being able to play because everything is dead. Where did I mention that,specifically? Where did I mention ME, TheBrsrkr, personally not being able to play the game with a Tonkor user as an argument? My personal preference has no bearing on game balance or mechanics. Which is why I didn't bring it up. Your beef seems to be that you like it, so it should be left alone. But this doesn't have any effect on game balance or mechanics either. Do you have no argument, unless you can argue a way that it doesn't affect game balance or mechanics in the way I said it does. 

 

Again, people don't matter to me when they're discussing things that are not the same topic that I am discussing. This is what you are doing. I'm not talking about how you feel about the weapon. Read and understand. 

Your personal beef has nothing to do with my fun factor. As long as you don't wish for an amicable solution that does not diminish anyone's experience, then you can live with it, for all I care.

 

[shyguyk]

1 minute ago, Currilicious said:

an amicable solution that does not diminish anyone's experience

 

These wont happen, so DE has to choose a side.

[(PSN)AngelShur]

7 hours ago, arch111 said:

So I need really good and hard to get mods to make it great? New players do not gave that.

As for the pointblank. A replacement for melee and shotgun?

Ok  i have to try that 0-range tactic.

It is broken, take a massive enemy spawn mission like the Intercept on Void T4 if you will and go after like 4 interceptions (by the 2nd already you'll see that the enemies will have an intensified spawn rate). Then with a "simple Tonkor" with only maybe 1 Forma, you'll be glad you brought it, cause just shooting at a group of enemies and let the Tonkor do it's job is what's going to happen... Also because the scaling of the enemies are not "perfect" you'll also notice that it's better to bring the Tonkor than a 6 Forma Vay Hek. 

A broken weapon has multiple ups and little downs, and Tonkor has this atm... (This more weapons with this problem, but I'll leave this discussion as it is, just on Tonkor)