Closed Beta Update V38182 (27th August 2014)

[Glottis-3D]

Hoping to get you all a comprehensive update on this as well, quite a fire has been lit under it. We weren’t able to get any significant performance improvements into this past update because the tasks were too big, but there are a lot of positive steps being taken in that area at the moment. I’m just not all that qualified to talk about that area, hence more technical types working on the update.

that is great, but tbh i already bought a better PC.

[Mustang]

[QUOTE=spookify;509192]2 HS should be a minimum… 3 Body shots… Balance it out…

You turn a corner an there is a shot gun boom dead wow! It feels so dumb… Even if you react faster and get 2 or 3 HS it still doesnt kill them in time.[/QUOTE]
This, although I would go for 2HK for good aim and 3HK for poor aim, rather than worrying about rewarding headshots, also more consistency would be good.

that is great, but tbh i already bought a better PC.

Can you buy me one too?

[Glottis-3D]

i think shotguns really have to be 1 shot kill. For me the most annoying thing is the damage over distance is far to high.

it is the matter of balanced combo between dmg falloff and spread.
in ideal situation all you need is spread. the longer range - the more spread - the less pellets hit. - the less dmg you deal.

butwith mercs differentiation in speed and hitbox that can lead to frustrating results. either sniper shotgunners or unkillable mercs.

so as a result i think of smthng like this:

goodshot = a lot of pellets hit. like 70+% hit.
normalshot = around 50% hit.
badshot = less than 20% pellets hit.

so in close range you can get any kind of shots.
in mid range you can get mostly normalshots due to spread.
in long range all you can get is badshots due to spread.

close/melee range:
1 good shot + anyshot = Kill for smal mercs.
2 good shots for mid/heavy mercs
2 good shots + anyshot for Rhino / other ultramercs.

midrange
(remember, that you cannot get a lot of goodshots here)
2 good shots for small mercs = 3 normalshots
2 good shots + anyshots for mid/heavy mercs = 4 normalshots
3 good shots for Rhino = 5 normalshots

longrange
since you cannot make a goodshot at long range due to spread
4 normalshots for small mercs = 5-6 badshots (usual shots for long range)
5 normalshots for mid/heavy = 7-8 badshots
6 normalshots for Rhino = 9-10 badshots.

[spookify]

[QUOTE=Glottis-3D;509198]it is the matter of balanced combo between dmg falloff and spread.
in ideal situation all you need is spread. the longer range - the more spread - the less pellets hit. - the less dmg you deal.

butwith mercs differentiation in speed and hitbox that can lead to frustrating results. either sniper shotgunners or unkillable mercs.

so as a result i think of smthng like this:

goodshot = a lot of pellets hit. like 70+% hit.
normalshot = around 50% hit.
badshot = less than 20% pellets hit.

so in close range you can get any kind of shots.
in mid range you can get mostly normalshots due to spread.
in long range all you can get is badshots due to spread.

close/melee range:
1 good shot + anyshot = Kill for smal mercs.
2 good shots for mid/heavy mercs
2 good shots + anyshot for Rhino / other ultramercs.

midrange
(remember, that you cannot get a lot of goodshots here)
2 good shots for small mercs = 3 normalshots
2 good shots + anyshots for mid/heavy mercs = 4 normalshots
3 good shots for Rhino = 5 normalshots

longrange
since you cannot make a goodshot at long range due to spread
4 normalshots for small mercs = 5-6 badshots (usual shots for long range)
5 normalshots for mid/heavy = 7-8 badshots
6 normalshots for Rhino = 9-10 badshots.[/QUOTE]

Looks good and would be worth testing…
2 Shot MIN! Even shotgun to shotgun…

[PixelTwitch]

[QUOTE=Exedore;509180]I’m not on IRC, so please bear with me… I’ll try to address each point.

From my POV there haven’t been any significant changes with weapon balance in months, so I’m curious, what are the specifics that lead to this impression?[/QUOTE]

While I understand that all weapons DPS should be fairly comparable to some extent. It feels like there is a disconnect between the balance concept you have selected and the game you are crafting. Balance could have been used to provide options but instead due to things such as the card system, customisation and Merc identity we have been left with meaning less choices in many circumstances. A prime example of this right now is SawBonez SMG9, Naders AK and Bushwhackers SMG. Each of them weapons have a slightly different feel and are pretty balanced between each other. Natural thought would be thats a good thing! However, regardless of the weapon you choose you play in the exact same way. You had/have a great opportunity to balance the weapons vs player skill, different play styles and adjusted roles! Naders AK could be more accurate with higher recoil, more damaging and slower RoF. It could have a higher DPS and be outright better but also outright harder to use. You could have Bushwackers SMG fire much faster with a larger clip with high dps but also high bullet deviation. It would be worse then Naders but in a casual players hands it could be better then they could ever be with Naders AK.

I think what I am getting at is…
You are missing a massive trick by balancing within classes rather then balancing with tiers. Once the Mercs abilities are made more integral and performance is increased I see no reason to not allow slight deviations on play styles. There is no reason that Thunder cannot have a Shotgun and why Phonix could not have a weak semi auto rifle. Think Counter Strikes AK vs M4A1, almost perfectly balanced but completely different to use… You can do better, and actually make your monetisation systems mean something other then a couple of Augs and skins that you will never get to see due to the speed and distances in game.

Smooth will have to detail that further; I know he’s already made some changes internally. Do you feel this change was out of alignment with direction or just poor?

I have spoken to Smooth about this already and I am pleased to see that he has some good ideas and is testing out multiple systems to do with the shotguns. I just hope the trigger gets pulled on a couple of the ideas everyone had. I do appreciate how hard it is to get these kinda changes accepted by a community that is frustrated! The changes do not need to be huge they just need to be more accessible and consistent here.

Yep, that was a mistake.

I understand that these kind of mistakes will happen. I just feel there is not enough testing in general from some of the crazy things we have seen.
unlimited wall jumps, kiras lazer on EV, Redeyes smoke on objectives, The way revive shields work, Victorias forward spawn, bridge spawning behind walls… These are things the guys here on the forums notice within hours of patches going live… I also understand the team is small but I feel you should slow down releasing patches to once a month and put us further behind your progress.

I happen to agree with a lot that you outlined in your previous video, but can’t say much more other than to point out that you all haven’t seen significant updates to Stopwatch and Objective modes in a while now.

Why thank you. However, I still believe the mode is fundamentally flawed on so many levels that I have no faith it will ever be as popular to watch as many other esports titles. I am just hoping you come up with something else eventually and leave Stopwatch as a public gamemode. As much as I understand the rest of the community want me hung drawn and quartered for such a statement >.<

It’s certainly not the intention, what is causing this impression?

Honestly this is likely down to the new progression system meaning that we are finding ourselves playing vs 5 skyhammers on EV objectives and 4 Proxies on C4 defuse. Also releasing the initial phase of the Card Loadout system made a lot of us realise that this is not going to be the game we was hoping for when it came to progression (and I really like your card concept I just hope you can make it meaningful). Also capture objectives in place of hack objectives and removing of multiple secondary objectives. You added ammo crates to maps, removed a lot of legitimate wall jumping paths and tricks. You have removed the 4 most interesting Mercs from the game (though I know its temp) and you enhanced the temp forward spawns after an objective. You made use run longer in empty spaces to get to an objective…

In your fairness you also added help up, carry objectives and long jump…

Well, this one isn’t exactly new, and I’m not sure why this is a bad thing. Care to explain?

Actually very simple…
Antiquated and abstract by design.
Quite a big limitation on design.
Not to mention they cancel each other out… Again, over balanced.
As I am sure your echo stats when the game releases will start to show.
I have been told many times that…
“Its because it makes sense to have bigger being stronger and slower”
What does not make sense is naked chick and heavily armoured phantom moving the same speed with the same hp.
I am not saying take it to extremes but certainly don’t be throwing “its how games are supposed to be” card at me when creating a Merc based system that has lots in common with Moba style hero pools where that kind of antiquated design has long been removed.

Which core elements are you referring to?

The Merc based system, the weapon system, the game modes, the speed, abilities, roles…
You have so many great concepts that are all so middle of the road in their inception. I do not mean quality wise I mean design wise. I still feel that DB has an identity crisis and it feels like it is being ignored.
No matter what you have been doing its not changing the fact behind the concept the game is simply move left and right while tracking a head and holding fire… I should love it really… I do well at it… Does not mean its fun…
Even in the cup matches, its what it always comes down to…

Yes, we got this one wrong. Hoping to give you all visibility (hyuck) on a far more comprehensive plan in the future.

[/Quote]
hyuck? lol

---

Now I know I can sound blunt in my posts and I do apologize for that. I am not great when it comes to reading and writing unfortunately.
I do really want this game to be great, I do intend to focus it on YouTube for a long time and I do look forward to playing a finished version.
I am just concerned I suppose.

[JBRAA]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to PixelTwitch again.

[Kendle]

Completely agree with Pixel on these points :-

A prime example of this right now is SawBonez SMG9, Naders AK and Bushwhackers SMG. Each of them weapons have a slightly different feel and are pretty balanced between each other. Natural thought would be thats a good thing! However, regardless of the weapon you choose you play in the exact same way. You had/have a great opportunity to balance the weapons vs player skill, different play styles and adjusted roles! Naders AK could be more accurate with higher recoil, more damaging and slower RoF. It could have a higher DPS and be outright better but also outright harder to use. You could have Bushwackers SMG fire much faster with a larger clip with high dps but also high bullet deviation. It would be worse then Naders but in a casual players hands it could be better then they could ever be with Naders AK.

I’ve been playing some DOD again lately (because I just can’t seem to stay away from it, most under-rated FPS ever IMO) and it has 3 primary weapons:

SMG = fast rof, low damage, moderate recoil
AR = low rof, high damage, insane recoil
Rifle = OHK bolt action single shot

They shouldn’t work in the same game but they do, and they work exactly the way Pixel describes, SMG is better than AR if both are in hands of Joe Newb, but once you get to grips with AR weapon control it’s better than SMG. Rifle is really hard to use well (miss and you die, simple as), but once you master it (which takes many months as there are many nuances such as movement penalties to content with) it’s devastating.

DB by comparison has very same-y / bland weapons, there’s little to choose between any of them, even the Soldier’s LMG is just a (very) slightly bigger AR (which is just a (very) slightly bigger SMG).

And the reason DB is this way is because …

No matter what you have been doing its not changing the fact behind the concept the game is simply move left and right while tracking a head and holding fire…

The majority of players in this game are / have been ET / ET:QW players, who think RLRL + tracking heads is all there is, and despite protestations to the contrary SD have listened to them, instead of having the courage of their convictions and doing something bold. I appreciate the majority of people here would then be even less interested in the game, but if I were SD I’d make the game I wanted, and if the testers didn’t like it, get new testers.

[spookify]

[QUOTE=Kendle;509206]
The majority of players in this game are / have been ET / ET:QW players, who think RLRL + tracking heads is all there is, and despite protestations to the contrary SD have listened to them, instead of having the courage of their convictions and doing something bold. I appreciate the majority of people here would then be even less interested in the game, but if I were SD I’d make the game I wanted, and if the testers didn’t like it, get new testers. :D[/QUOTE]

This is true that a lot of us are ET or RTCW or QW players and we have tried to bring balance to the RLRL… The game is also about headshots. We have also played many other games and have brought that knowledge into this game. A lot of the best shots in OLD ET have actually passed through this game and it is a shame that most are still not around.

I do not actually think this game is very far off from what SD was originally anticipating. A slower TTK then BF and COD but with small hit boxes to separate skill.

Like SD has said many times this is only the Beta and a true Beta…

I actually love playing this game but it is beyond frustrating sometimes in many areas. I dont have mouse feel I would like and player movements boggle my mind sometimes…

As I have said 1000x before add-ons are going to be a game changer… Red-Dot and 3.4x are going to completely flip this game. We will soon me talking about increasing or reducing recoil while scoped.

I would still like to see collisions and player movement and animation improved before any of this

[INF3RN0]

Another idea for possible re-works of shotgun mechanics (combining an old idea with a new idea)…

(1) Max DMG is determined by % of pellets to hit target on an exponential scale (ex. 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64…)
(2) Progressive DMG multiplier for consecutive hits without missfire. Default MP= 1x, Consecutive MP = 1.5x

[PixelTwitch]

[QUOTE=INF3RN0;509227]Another idea for possible re-works of shotgun mechanics (combining an old idea with a new idea)…

(1) Max DMG is determined by % of pellets to hit target on an exponential scale (ex. 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64…)
(2) Progressive DMG multiplier for consecutive hits without missfire. Default MP= 1x, Consecutive MP = 1.5x[/QUOTE]

I like these ideas however one system that is rarely used but works REALLY well is that of lowering the damage done per pellet that is hit.

10 damage for 1 pellet, 9 damage each for 2 pellet and so on.

This allows the weapon to be not strong at range but not useless
and also limits the damage it can do at close range.

[INF3RN0]

I’m getting a bit bored of the lack of a real unique handling among weapons as well. I’m looking for true variety, but anything outside of the default weaponry feels overly generic and highly diminished in terms of handling skill. Semi-autos still feel overly effective at body spamming and shotguns just need a rework (this +/- dmg/range hasn’t been working). I really liked the weapon variety offered in Loadout for example, which was pretty successful at allowing a wide range of gun play styles to co-exist. On another note, Loadout is also an example of how even an “old school” competitive oriented FPS meta/modes need to offer some actual depth and originality to not fall flat in a few months.

As far as DB currently stands, I can’t imagine weapons getting any more accurate or deadly. I haven’t had any real trouble in merc vs merc encounters- it’s more a case of inconsistent weapon design that causes a feeling of annoyance. I personally feel like the main things that are needed are (1) true weapon variety (2) at least a moderate attempt to enforce skill consistency across weapon design (3) expansion of the merc meta (4) making all aspects of game play feel complimentary and eliminating the potential for repetition as much as possible. Every action just feels like it overlaps with the next in all areas and the long term appeal just doesn’t exist yet (at least for me).

There’s just a lack of a feeling of compliment between the big chunks of the game (mercs, weapons, abilities, maps, teamwork, objs). So for me personally I’d like to see the future game development set some more adventurous goals towards more offering more unique weapon types, having the merc based meta fleshed out, and enforcing a strong sense of cooperative game play mechanics and content. Driving Freze out of servers can only motivate my weekend playtime for so long lol… I expect the game will have to hit OBT within the next month or two, so I guess only time will tell if I’m just a demanding critic .

Prof dump from current patch, 90% EU server during normal weekend play times.

[Exedore]

[QUOTE=PixelTwitch;509202]Now I know I can sound blunt in my posts and I do apologize for that. I am not great when it comes to reading and writing unfortunately.
I do really want this game to be great, I do intend to focus it on YouTube for a long time and I do look forward to playing a finished version.
I am just concerned I suppose.[/QUOTE]
The tone isn’t an issue at all; I’d have no qualms with saying so if it were. I’m not about to claim that the game is where we want it to be right now, and I’m also not about to claim that we’ve got “Games as a Service” nailed as a studio yet, I’m just trying to be clear on how we’re trying and want to try to address each. As ever, the final call will ultimately lay with the players!

[Glottis-3D]

projectile weapons pleeeze!
5-6 diverse projectile weapons with different balistics, different ROF, range, area-cover etc etc.

i agree that most of the guns are a bit similar to each other.
Bushwacker could have used semi auto arbalet.
Proxy with a shrapnel flak cannon.

maybe even Bumerange-type weapon with very hard-to-master mechanics

[PixelTwitch]

I’m also not about to claim that we’ve got “Games as a Service” nailed as a studio yet, I’m just trying to be clear on how we’re trying and want to try to address each. As ever, the final call will ultimately lay with the players!

I fail to see this happening…
Personally I am glad its not the same as ET and ETQW but that is what the majority of the players have been asking for and you have been intentionally moving away from that.

The one thing that frustrates people about the “being clear on we’re trying and want to try and address each.” is that your game is still in deep development but the way you communicate to the player base is as if the game has been out and fully released for years. I doubt that there is a single player in this community that has any idea what you are really doing. Actually out of all the developers that post here I find your post the most vague.

Your NDA is holding strong and the player base here in this forum is only around 30 people strong at the moment. If you want our help then use us… If not then tell us… Right now I have lots of issues with the game that I do not even dare mention as if it does get addressed it would likely not be in a way that we as a community think is right for balance, depth or performance.

We are all guilty of being extreme in many respects. Even the things that we hate the most can often be changed very easily by tweaking values but often I feel you see our hate as something more deep seeded and start reworking entire systems. If there is one thing in life that will always remain true its that people will always hate losing something more then they will love receiving something. Allow us to give feedback on things BEFORE you make them and we can help you avoid silly little pitfalls that require sweeping changes later.

I also get that a lot of the players here on these forums have no concept of design, balance and emotion and that they will likely take issue with some ideas. However if you are going to allow them players to cut off one of your most valuable resources then you are really only hurting yourself.

[PixelTwitch]

[QUOTE=Glottis-3D;509250]projectile weapons pleeeze!
5-6 diverse projectile weapons with different balistics, different ROF, range, area-cover etc etc.

i agree that most of the guns are a bit similar to each other.
Bushwacker could have used semi auto arbalet.
Proxy with a shrapnel flak cannon.

maybe even Bumerange-type weapon with very hard-to-master mechanics[/QUOTE]

Due to the way the networking is done in DB I feel that projectiles could have many issues.
Especially when it comes to slower moving projectiles.

Due to player speed projectiles would look like they are coming from their sides and they will look like they are missing you when they are hitting you. I dread to think how crazy it would look from a spectators view as well. You could do all projectiles based on server I suppose but it would only help so much. The speed of the game means the variation over time is quite great. You already see this with Naders nade luncher.

[Exedore]

…Once the Mercs abilities are made more integral and performance is increased I see no reason to not allow slight deviations on play styles.

Neither me, in fact we’d look to encourage it. Abilities and performance are two of our highest dev priorities at the moment, and we’ll have to do a good bit of re-balancing to fit once that’s in a better spot.

…I just feel there is not enough testing in general from some of the crazy things we have seen.

Agreed; this is something we’re trying to improve… we simply cannot catch most of these issues in internal playtests, and we’re constantly working with our internal testers to try to improve their effectiveness. But the wall jumps, for example: we knew there would be issues, but chose to release it quickly rather than delay an update to put more stringent limits in.

Honestly this is likely down to the new progression system meaning that we are finding ourselves playing vs 5 skyhammers on EV objectives and 4 Proxies on C4 defuse…Also capture objectives in place of hack objectives and removing of multiple secondary objectives. You added ammo crates to maps, removed a lot of legitimate wall jumping paths and tricks.

I was indeed worried about what the progression system would do to the live game experience, but there’s only so much that we could do about that. We’ve been discussing ways to mitigate this since it went live. We removed Hacks as an objective type a while back because they were so similar to C4; in the case of Trainyard, it was just simpler to make it a Capture. I’m not sure I’ve explicitly stated it, but we’re working through the maps and removing all Captures as we go, hence Trainyard now being C4. We really, really need to know if we’ve removed trick jumps!!! Totally not the intention; in fact we have dedicated time allotted for LDs to look for spaces to add them! The only reason I could see these going away is if they were bugs, but please point them

What does not make sense is naked chick and heavily armoured phantom moving the same speed with the same hp.

Can’t say I disagree with this, actually… it’s food for thought at the moment, and could factor into our playstyle discussions.

You have so many great concepts that are all so middle of the road in their inception. I do not mean quality wise I mean design wise. I still feel that DB has an identity crisis and it feels like it is being ignored.

I’m not really capable of splitting up quality and design conceptually, call it an occupational hazard. I do think that this has been an issue but has improved in the last half a year, but still has a good ways to go.

[Glottis-3D]

[QUOTE=PixelTwitch;509254]Due to the way the networking is done in DB I feel that projectiles could have many issues.
Especially when it comes to slower moving projectiles.

Due to player speed projectiles would look like they are coming from their sides and they will look like they are missing you when they are hitting you. I dread to think how crazy it would look from a spectators view as well. You could do all projectiles based on server I suppose but it would only help so much. The speed of the game means the variation over time is quite great. You already see this with Naders nade luncher.[/QUOTE]

i also am fearing that. but still i would like to test some of these.
as for nader - i am not pleased with his nades at all.

is there any UE3 game with good projectile weapons. by good i mean like Rocket Launcher, Plazma, Grenades from quake3 ?

[Exedore]

The one thing that frustrates people about the “being clear on we’re trying and want to try and address each.” is that your game is still in deep development but the way you communicate to the player base is as if the game has been out and fully released for years.

In regard to the way we communicate matching a development and not a release, any suggestions on how to change this? Most of us as developers are very used to doing most of our communication post-release!

[Glottis-3D]

In regard to the way we communicate matching a development and not a release, any suggestions on how to change this? Most of us as developers are very used to doing most of our communication post-release!

discussing risky things. like “we are going to try to increase spread for medics” a year ago would help to avoid a lot of unnessessary rage.

like “we are going to delete hacking object in waterloo FOREVER”

[PixelTwitch]

In regard to the way we communicate matching a development and not a release, any suggestions on how to change this? Most of us as developers are very used to doing most of our communication post-release!

The biggest mistake I have noticed recently is trying to hype up the updates.
By hyping up a phase 1 or buggy system you cannot avoid player disappointment.

Treat us as a resource or testers rather then customers.

You need to make us understand its development and do it again and again and again.

Your design is your design and we have no right to make you change it.
Here we are loud but still less then 0.0001% of your potential future player base.
Be stronger and tell us NO! When you dislike our ideas.

You can communicate your direction just as easily by blocking off potential routes as you can lighting up others.
I know time is limited but SHOW your progression and SHOW show your tests!
Even if its just having one of your QA guys quickly making small posts in a locked mini update thread with screenshots of new art and talk about new weapons. Let that same QA guy communicate back to you what people where concerned about.

You would be amazed at how much smoother and quicker this could be if you just invested in us a little more.
Your sitting down and getting on with it is seeming to often turning into false economy.

If the players really do have the ultimate say then why are you waiting till a system is complete before taking our feedback seriously?
If giving info is too time consuming then why are you all spending so much time defending not doing so?

TL:DR - We are emotional creatures us gamers, if you create hype or potential choice without delivering the goods you are only going to make us into little cry babies. Firm but Fair… Open and Honest… Confidence without Arrogance…

EDIT: Smaller things you should keep back for a week after a patch and then do a post patch hidden changes list to see if we noticed and how we felt without our pre-perceived impressions. I am only talking about tweaks to existing systems here. Not complete new systems.