@scott, Weapon Tiering (Concise)

[Lumireaver]

I respect your attempts to design things in a balanced way, and acknowledge that inevitably certain weapons are going to naturally fall out of relevance as long as you're using the current "enemies-scale-up"-schema. That said, deliberately introducing tiered weapons kind of invalidates our earlier efforts/dozens of hours with the original weapons.

 

I believe it would be more beneficial to design a mechanic which allows players to upgrade their older weapons; either with (mastery locked) plat/alert only upgrade kits, performance enhancing skins, or by requiring them as components in re-crafts. Anything to cultivate a sense of progression is better than just throwing a Burston 2 on the market.

 

PS: <3

Edited August 15, 2013 by Lumireaver

[Malikon]

I agree with part of Lumireaver's post.  The invalidation of earlier efforts or "upgrades as skins" parts i will disagree with on the basis that this is basic weapon progression and the game will go nowhere without it. 

 

I will support requiring previous weapons as components in re-crafts, as that acknowledges and works within the concept of weapon progression.  You must have trained on Bronco to be able to properly use Bronco Prime, and once you've mastered Bronco, you can rebuild it into a Bronco Prime, once that is mastered, you can rebuild it into Bronco Alpha, etc etc.   It makes sense and gives a solid purpose to the origional weapons in each series so that they can never be "forgotten" or useless.  +1 to Lumireaver.

 

Unsure on upgrade kits, outcome could vary wildly based on the implementation, one way it could be no different than the skins which I disagree with, the other way it would be effectively a re-craft.

 

 

Any to cultivate a sense of progression is better than just throwing a Burston 2 on the market.

Absolutely agree.

Edited August 15, 2013 by Malikon

[Lane]

Oh yes, more mastery rank perks, PUHLEEZ.

[Metalarcher]

Yeah, I for one am not too happy with weapons being tiered.  Weapons having different uses is fine (i.e. one is good for taking down infested, another is good for mowing down a single heavy enemy, etc.), but why should we have to get rid of old weapons that we grew to love?  I mean, weapons add more options to the game.  Taking those options away at higher levels leads to staleness.  I don't want to see everyone running around with an ogris, acrid, and reaper prime exclusively, nor do I want to be using those weapons.  It's boring to be forced into a narrower selection of weapons as you progress.

 

In short, you should have more options as you progress in the game, not the same amount or even less.  Let ogris and acrid be harder to get, but don't make them more viable than, say, a regular old latron.

[Thaumatos]

My only real issue with a tiered weapon system based on mastery rank is that mastery rank can only be levelled by playing with multiple different frames and weapons.  If you don't want to use them, you don't have to....until content outclasses you and you're forced to tier up by playing with things you don't even want to use.

 

So if you're going to start tiering weapons, first change your mastery rank system.

[Bakercompany86]

I respect your attempts to design things in a balanced way, and acknowledge that inevitably certain weapons are going to naturally fall out of relevance as long as you're using the current "enemies-scale-up"-schema. That said, deliberately introducing tiered weapons kind of invalidates our earlier efforts/dozens of hours with the original weapons.

 

I believe it would be more beneficial to design a mechanic which allows players to upgrade their older weapons; either with (mastery locked) plat/alert only upgrade kits, performance enhancing skins, or by requiring them as components in re-crafts. Anything to cultivate a sense of progression is better than just throwing a Burston 2 on the market.

 

PS: <3

 

 

I would think if you make the weapon a component of it's own upgrade, this would benefit DE and players.

 

Players no longer have their weapons invalidated, but watch them progress down an evolutionary path to the final stage being the endgame version.

 

DE benefits because players MUST grind out the weapon previous to it's better counterparts, which halts players from being able to merely skip the to the upgraded version.

 

This gives them more playtime out of us, and added chance to sell platinum.

 

 

I think it's win/win.

 

EDIT:  This also lends itself to the mastery system.  You're grinding out 3 weapons instead of 1 = more mastery points.

Edited August 15, 2013 by Bakercompany86

[dukarriope]

The problem with rebuilding existing weapons in to a new one is that you lose your catalyst in them. Unless, say, building a Burston Prime out of a supercharged Burston netted me a supercharged Burston Prime, I would likely never bother with the Prime itself.

[-Kittens-]

I'm sorry but if you plan on playing this game long term for real the concept that you'll only ever use 5 forma and a braton mk238 fancy camo bullpup edition for 10 hours of play a week for say oh, A HUNDRED WEEKS is completely ridiculous.

 

Absolutely ludicrous.

 

Yes, there may be a pool of weapons, and yes, you may have your sentimental fave in every class you go to try the latest flavor of mod type over in a "reliable lab" of usage you have down to a razor honed sheen and shine, but the concept that every weapon must somehow be comparable and compatible for every situation two years from now is completely absurd.

 

For this game to continue in a meaningful way, there must be progression, especially with weapons absolutely dominating late game content.

 

Yes, the armor issue is serious but with or without it there will be rolling tier changes and new things to try, and yes, some of those things will be markedly better than the starting content on purpose, and that's what needs to happen in order to drive this game forward.

Edited August 16, 2013 by -Kittens-

[Lumireaver]

Yes, there may be a pool of weapons, and yes, you may have your sentimental fave in every class you go to try the latest flavor of mod type over in a "reliable lab" of usage you have down to a razor honed sheen and shine, but the concept that every weapon must somehow be comparable and compatible for every situation two years from now is completely absurd.

 

For this game to continue in a meaningful way, there must be progression, especially with weapons absolutely dominating late game content.

 

@ "...comparable and compatible for every situation..." - That's a bit of an unreasonable exaggeration. Everything should be comparable, but not everything should be equally effective in every respect. (A flamethrower wouldn't do a whole lot to a Moa, but it would roast a Charger alive. Thanks to this dynamic, it might still see some niche use despite being a generally inferior choice. Despite it's shortcomings, the flamethrower should be strong enough to fend off other enemies.) This kind of balance should broadly apply to all weapons.

 

If you'll entertain this idea for a moment... from a lore perspective, if within two years the Corpus figure out a better, more energy efficient way of slinging plasma bolts it stands to reason that they would retire their older Dera models in favor a newer, more efficient model. There might be no downsides to this Super-Dera compared to its predecessor. Simply releasing the new Dera on the market, (or clan tech, w/e) however would mean that anyone who built the older model has had all of their time put into the first kind of invalidated. As a gameplay mechanic, it would be a better idea to require players to build up to the new Dera using the old one in some way. (Upgrade kit, blueprint component, etc.)

 

That said, there's no pressing need to keep inflating numbers.

In reality, doing so doesn't do much to increase difficulty or add replayability. It just blows up the required time investment.

[Bakercompany86]

The problem with rebuilding existing weapons in to a new one is that you lose your catalyst in them. Unless, say, building a Burston Prime out of a supercharged Burston netted me a supercharged Burston Prime, I would likely never bother with the Prime itself.

 

 

The other point to using previous weapons as a component for upgrades is that you keep catalyst/forma upgrades in the weapon.  It's your same weapon "ascending" into the Vandal and Prime versions.

 

Sorry I thought I mentioned it.  The idea actually stemmed from the communities desire to not lose their catalysts and formas because they wished to pursue a prime weapon.

[Malikon]

The other point to using previous weapons as a component for upgrades is that you keep catalyst/forma upgrades in the weapon.  It's your same weapon "ascending" into the Vandal and Prime versions.

 

Sorry I thought I mentioned it.  The idea actually stemmed from the communities desire to not lose their catalysts and formas because they wished to pursue a prime weapon.

I can't say that I'm good with the whole "I'm using a tater'd Braton so I should get a tater'd Braton Prime " line of thought.  It's of the same general model, yes, but its a different weapon.  Plus, I'm still failing to comprehend why expendable upgrade items that are plentiful and easily stockpiled (whether through alerts or through platinum) are such problems for players to "lose".

 

I get part of it.  You'd feel as if you wasted something.  People go through the same upgrade process with computers, cars, phones, tablets, office furniture, software, and pretty much everything imaginable every few years, and all of those are way more expensive in both money and time investment than the potential loss of a tater and some formas.  Most people don't complain about that though, and even the ones that do will willingly go out of their way to upgrade at the earliest opportunity anyway. 

 

So someone please explain to me the part of this issue that I'm missing.

[LazyKnight]

 

So someone please explain to me the part of this issue that I'm missing.

They are not familiar with upgrade systems like the one monster hunter freedom unite uses(or similar games that have upgrade trees for weapons) and they are afraid of trying it. It works for other games but I do not know why they are hesitant with experimentation other than fear of upsetting people that might not want to upgrade?

 

That Monster hunter game most addictive quality by far was the weapon upgrade system, the weapon both got stronger and looked better. DE could do something similar but I doubt they will and it looks like they want each weapon to be a distinct personality that is worth discarding your current weapon to try something new.

Edited August 16, 2013 by LazyKnight

[Bakercompany86]

I can't say that I'm good with the whole "I'm using a tater'd Braton so I should get a tater'd Braton Prime " line of thought.  It's of the same general model, yes, but its a different weapon.  

 

Have you ever converted a standard weapon to national match quality?  Like say, an M14 or AR15?

[LazyKnight]

Have you ever converted a standard weapon to national match quality?  Like say, an M14 or AR15?

Something like going from a barrette m82a2 to the modern version that is the m107cq they might as well be different guns. I know enough about guns to know that 2 weapon in the same series might only share a name in common. That is one reason I think upgrading guns can be stupid if you do any research on gun or how things are named in a series.

[Malikon]

Have you ever converted a standard weapon to national match quality?  Like say, an M14 or AR15?

Yeah, that little nubbin down in the lower receiver to enable burst-fire can be a pain in the butt if you don't get it right.  But that isn't applicable here as we're not taking the same rifle and giving it a burst-fire/full-auto mode (AR15 -> M16/M4).  We're talking about radical changes. 

 

For example: 

Braton -> Braton Prime conversion

1) Higher damage would mean either more FPS on the same lower caliber round via rifling and chamber alterations or extensive modification to the barrel, chamber, etc to support higher calibur rounds.  Discounting using hollow points or talons or whatever as those are ammunitions (read: mods)  not changes to the rifle.

 

2)  Lower fire rate would require multiple adjustments to the lower receiver and firing pin/slider and some modification to the procedure used to cycle the chamber and release excess gas/materials.

 

3)  Accuracy the same and +5 rounds per mag is a magazine addon, these are discounted.

 

All of the REAL changes to this rifle bring about significant alterations to shape and handling of the weapon, and possible alterations in its behavior.

 

So tell me again how a  module (catalyst) that was fitted into an older model of rifle with almost completely different components can be put in place in the newly remodelled version of the rifle and achieve the same effect without significant changes to the module (catalyst) itself?

[Bakercompany86]

Something like going from a barrette m82a2 to the modern version that is the m107cq they might as well be different guns. I know enough about guns to know that 2 weapon in the same series might only share a name in common. That is one reason I think upgrading guns can be stupid if you do any research on gun or how things are named in a series.

 

What I mean is:

 

When you convert a weapon to national match quality, what do you do?  You replace the barrel, trigger assembly, the bolt, but the rest of the weapon for the most part remains the same.

 

This is my concept for requiring previous versions to be a requirement in the newer versions.  And the same logic as to why you would keep your forma and catalyst.

[LazyKnight]

What I mean is:

 

When you convert a weapon to national match quality, what do you do?  You replace the barrel, trigger assembly, the bolt, but the rest of the weapon for the most part remains the same.

 

This is my concept for requiring previous versions to be a requirement in the newer versions.  And the same logic as to why you would keep your forma and catalyst.

The problem is for say the Latron verse the latron Prime is they share nothing in common. Braton and Braton pirme are even worse and do not look like they even share a frame in common.They do not use any similar or base components and the only example that would transfer in rebuilding it up to a latron prime would be the bullets.

 

I do know what your talking about with the civilian version of some guns being different from military version and illegal conversion kits upgrading them. What you said would make far more sense in the context of upgrading a weapon to an illegal Vandal version.

 

I do not care if forma& catalyst can be transferred to the new weapon I have no issues with that

Edited August 16, 2013 by LazyKnight

[Skepsis]

I think it would be a neat idea to have options and such for the weapons themselves. Finding parts along the way, crafted, or just from using the weapon that you could swap out for different stats that would effect the model you wield.

 

What I mean is, Say.. a braton with an extended barrel would lower the fire rate, but reduce recoil because the weapon would be better center mass, and would tighten the cone of fire.

 

Or a magazine assembly that would increase the capacity but lower accuracy due to the added weight.

 

Just a concept idea for balance, also gives people options as well as specifics they could add to their favorite weapons to move them into a higher tier.

[MoustacheMike]

I will point out one thing :

If they have upgrade weapons then how will they make money with weapons slots?

Edited August 16, 2013 by MoustacheMike

[Malikon]

What I mean is:

 

When you convert a weapon to national match quality, what do you do?  You replace the barrel, trigger assembly, the bolt, but the rest of the weapon for the most part remains the same.

 

This is my concept for requiring previous versions to be a requirement in the newer versions.  And the same logic as to why you would keep your forma and catalyst.

If you replace the barrel, trigger assembly and the bolt, you have a different weapon.  Which is why you shouldn't keep your forma or catalyst because the only part that is the same at that point is the stock.

[LazyKnight]

I will point out one thing :

If they have upgrade weapons then how will they make money with weapons slots?

Same problem that latron prime has it is better to just ditch the old version and use the same slot. I do not need two Bratons either I would sell the one that was less powerful or was uglier.

 

Edit: typos

Edited August 16, 2013 by LazyKnight

[MoustacheMike]

Same problem that latron prime has it is better to just ditch the old version and use the same slot. I do not need two Bratons either I would sell the one that has less powerful or was uglier.

True i might be too tired to think properly (:

[-Kittens-]

@ "...comparable and compatible for every situation..." - That's a bit of an unreasonable exaggeration. Everything should be comparable, but not everything should be equally effective in every respect. (A flamethrower wouldn't do a whole lot to a Moa, but it would roast a Charger alive. Thanks to this dynamic, it might still see some niche use despite being a generally inferior choice. Despite it's shortcomings, the flamethrower should be strong enough to fend off other enemies.) This kind of balance should broadly apply to all weapons.

 

If you'll entertain this idea for a moment... from a lore perspective, if within two years the Corpus figure out a better, more energy efficient way of slinging plasma bolts it stands to reason that they would retire their older Dera models in favor a newer, more efficient model. There might be no downsides to this Super-Dera compared to its predecessor. Simply releasing the new Dera on the market, (or clan tech, w/e) however would mean that anyone who built the older model has had all of their time put into the first kind of invalidated. As a gameplay mechanic, it would be a better idea to require players to build up to the new Dera using the old one in some way. (Upgrade kit, blueprint component, etc.)

 

That said, there's no pressing need to keep inflating numbers.

In reality, doing so doesn't do much to increase difficulty or add replayability. It just blows up the required time investment.

 

 

It's not an idea at all, it's years of observing weapon and content metrics in various games, and you're absolutely dead wrong.

 

Take a gander at ME3MP weapon content if you'd like an easily observable flow that pretty much backs up everything I said.

Edited August 16, 2013 by -Kittens-

[Bakercompany86]

If you replace the barrel, trigger assembly and the bolt, you have a different weapon.  Which is why you shouldn't keep your forma or catalyst because the only part that is the same at that point is the stock.

 

Yes but you keep the core of the weapon.  The receiver, the stock, sight assembly, charging handle, forward assist (in the case of the AR15).  And if I had to guess a part on the weapon that would contain forma and a catalyst, I would think receiver.

 

Anyway it's just a theory.  And only my personal opinion.  To me it just made sense that you're upgrading your current weapon.  And I thought that it sounded cool for your favorite weapon to "ascend" into the higher versions instead of just being replaced.

[LazyKnight]

Yes but you keep the core of the weapon.  The receiver, the stock, sight assembly, charging handle, forward assist (in the case of the AR15).  And if I had to guess a part on the weapon that would contain forma and a catalyst, I would think receiver.

 

Anyway it's just a theory.  And only my personal opinion.  To me it just made sense that you're upgrading your current weapon.  And I thought that it sounded cool for your favorite weapon to "ascend" into the higher versions instead of just being replaced.

It would be cool if they had a vandal upgrade for weapon. That is all a vandal weapon is over a standard it has custom parts and is at a higher performance specs. That is a good idea for some weapon and is always something DE can do if they do not want to keep making new originals or primes.