DIRTY BOMB UPDATE: Version 17437


(Maca) #201

This. I dislike the chaos that FULL loadout customization brings, not being able to tell what my team mates and enemies have in store when I see them. Customizing loadout is possible, but I think every merc should have their own set of things they can buy and customize with. One item should be tied to the merc (instead of class, as it is in FireFall), and then you can customize other items and weapons with things from that mercs pool. You need to unlock/pay for these of course.
This way you can customize to certain extent your play, you don’t need a **** ton of real different mercs, and things are easily balanced, and you get a lot of things people can buy/earn.

Edit: Anti, we on the same wavelength ;D


(Anti) #202

[QUOTE=strychzilla;436367]I still think loadouts are a bad choice for a F2P model.

You should have 4 (I know you’re going to stick with 5) classes, with a default loadout. Then give the players the freedom to build their loadout the way they want and make more loadouts for the same class purchasable.

Example:

I pick medic default loadout is:

Primary: SMG
Secondary: Glock (****ty w/e)
Grenade: Standard
Special 1: HoT Healthpacks
Special 2: Revive paddle
Active Passive: You regenerate HP twice as fast (+2hp/ps)

I can than purchase a shotgun to replace my SMG, a Desert Eagle (current pistol) to replace my ****ty glock, I can purchase a wide range of grenades like a DoT nade (to prevent the other team from healing) or an AoE revive nade, an AoE heal nade, whatever the **** nade I want and be creative (yet balanced) with it. I can purchase different health packs, we can have one be a HoT, instant heal, have one that suppresses damage by 75% for 2-3 seconds, you can even make a real aggressive medic and have him drop bait packs that actually do damage to enemies that walk over them. Revive paddles can revive players slower but give them a HoT on pick up, have limited charges but gives the revived player invulnerability for 2 - 3 seconds, revives player with less health but it’s instant, paddles no longer revive, has a lower RoF, and does 60 damage to enemies.

Now of course their can be some OP ass builds if you go that direction. How do you control it for comp play? Simple, put a value to every item. Example:

SMG 4 pts
Glock 4 pts
Grenade: 3 pts
Special 1 HoT pack: 3 pts
Special 2 Revive Paddle: 3 pts
Active Passive: Regeneration 3 pts

Total: 20 pts

You can set a value limit on your servers to restrict builds (similar to how you do RAD soldiers.) If a certain build is OP in comp play you can increase the value of the item and thus make the combo not valid in comp play but still fun in pub play.

Example:

Value limit for comp play is 22, your build is 22, you’re using a strong passive with a special nade. It’s considered OP. You increase the value of the grenade by 1 or 2 and the combo is no longer possible.

The benefits of this is you give the players the freedom to build their character the way they want to, the way they want to play and still make a **** ton of cash. Strategy hits an entirely new level but still keeps the same FPS genre. Classes have a very different feel to them and are definitely unique compared to others.

Other passive ideas just to throw them out there.

Lt: Regenerates Ammo
Lt: Packs no long refill ammo but refill a grenade
Lt: Your weapons are more steady when ADS
Sold (base HP is 100): Your sold has +20 hp
Sold: Your conc nades no longer impair movement, your conc nade now do damage
Eng: Your movement speed is increased
Eng: You complete objectives faster
Eng: Your deployables can now be manually set up to decrease load up time.
Sniper: You make no noise when moving
Sniper: You load your bullets faster (higher RoF w/ bolt action rifles.)

I think it’s a better approach with a much higher cash potential.[/QUOTE]

It’s a nice idea and we’ve discussed similar stuff, I still think there are some issues with it though:

[ul]
[li]Games with similar systems have been accused of being Pay2Win (Blacklight), even if a lot of the stuff is side grades
[/li][li]When so many combinations become possible balance becomes harder to predict, test and manage
[/li][li]Points would help with balance issues, but that assumes the point costs we apply are fair
[/li][li]It can make it very hard for opponents to identify what enemy they are coming up against in a fire fight (“Does he have X or Y??”)
[/li][/ul]

To some extent what you’ve described is Brink with points :slight_smile:


(Hundopercent) #203

[QUOTE=Hyperg;436373]So instead of having preset loadouts, you bring to the table whatever you think it’s ok with your playstyle and inline with the team effort. Yup, this goes into the “builds” category.

Actually something like this happens in FireFall already (system is in flux tho), where you customize a certain class with some abilities and weapons of your choice, but the battleframe (that’s how they’re called) has some constraints for gear load, power consumption and cpu power (each gear piece has a vector in this space).

There are some issues with too much granularity and too few distinction between items (to make each build really stand out) but that’s something really worth trying.[/QUOTE]

If you want to play a utility medic in comp play you can spend most of your value you points on heal nades and suppression packs.

If you want to play combat medic you can run a stronger gun, but have to use the HoT packs use a DoT nade.


(Hundopercent) #204

[QUOTE=Anti;436377]It’s a nice idea and we’ve discussed similar stuff, I still think there are some issues with it though:

[ul]
[li]Games with similar systems have been accused of being Pay2Win (Blacklight), even if a lot of the stuff is side grades[/li][li]When so many combinations become possible balance becomes harder to predict, test and manage[/li][li]Points would help with balance issues, but that assumes the point costs we apply are fair[/li][li]It can make it very hard for opponents to identify what enemy they are coming up against in a fire fight (“Does he have X or Y??”)[/li][/ul]

To some extent what you’ve described is Brink with points :)[/QUOTE]

I played BLR (over 7 months) it’s not P2W. I’ve been kicked and accused of hacking on a default loadout. The problem with that game is the community consists of a bunch of moronic sheep that can’t think on their own. With Mercs people will still say it’s P2W if a certain merc is stronger than another (Ex. Textbook Kate and Juan in RAD soldiers.)

Balance will be harder, I can’t argue that but it would be a hell of a lot more fun.

You can make certain items have visual que’s. I.E. health pack is red instead of green. a shield pops up on top of the players head if he has reduced damage.

Brink had terrible maps with impossible chokes and the buffing system took too long giving defense an advantage if offense didn’t wipe them. DB is faster and your packs come back faster and I wouldn’t add a pack that buffs your weapon damage.

Again those ideas were just off the top of my head you can obviously make them more balanced =P

Edit: I can see you guys have already committed a lot of time to the mercs so I wouldn’t think my idea would fit in with what you guys are doing anyway. I just fear you guys are going to be charging 10$ a merc and that defeats the purpose of a F2P game. I think you would make more money with micro transactions then expecting people to drop 10$ per merc. It also sounds plain as **** tbh. I buy a merc and I have to use set weapons with him. It’s an immediate turn off. I would rather buy models/skins for my load out than to play a premade loadout.


(ImageOmega) #205

I really like the idea of passive skills. This would solve the debate of whether every class should have auto health regen as this could be a standard passive every class could choose from. Besides that you just opened up the doors for another stream of revenue for Splash Damage.

I also like the idea of DoT grenades as a mechanic to stop players from being able to heal since the current med packs stop healing when damaged. But, then does that bring in a need for a skill to counter this? IE: Some sort of cleanse to remove said DoT? Or possibly the DoT is minimal like being on fire in TF2.

Interesting going the RAD Soldiers route for Dirty Bomb’s classes. It actually makes me wonder why they didn’t do this in the first place. This had to have been brought up in discussions. Maybe Anti can give us some insight?

There are a few negatives to this approach, one being cosmetic. Cosmetically, SD would have to rework how they handle player models since they would no longer be tied to the load out. Also, this would prevent other plays from immediately recognizing what abilities a player has. In RAD Soldiers there is plenty of time to study the screen and you can easily see the guns in the enemy’s hands to know if they are rocking that 7pt Sniper Rifle or the basic 5pt. In Dirty Bomb we don’t have that luxury as it may be too late before we recognize the potential threat. Spotting the current Lt. and knowing he can lace the EV with an arty is easy to recognize versus seeing the Lt. in game who will be throwing air strike markers. That is just one example of such immediate recognition of a classes abilities based on their model. Probably a poor one since a Lt. would probably be placing that arty or air strike before you even saw him. But, I am sure you can see what I am getting at with this. Another example is when you see the female engy you know look out for mines or what MrEd confirmed, the female assault sporting the grenade launcher.

Secondly, does this put us on the same path of Diablo 3? Since we have a limited number of points to spend and spots to fill are we really going to be just running around with cookie cutter builds? If someone is using a certain “build” are they going to be the immediate subject of ridicule because they are not as effective as build x. While I do agree that it opens the doors for more possibility, but does it really only encourage players wanting to be cookie cutter?

Finally, wouldn’t this approach really encourage the pay to win mindset? In order to have cookie cutter build x, y, or z will newer players feel they are at a disadvantage and think they have to pay in order to get the skills they need to compete (and I mean in a pub). I am sure the option to level and purchase items or skills based on in game rewards will be there, but that does not really change the fact that newer players may feel they are at a disadvantage. I know Call of Duty does do this well as far as “builds” and choosing what passives or guns you’d want or need. Does that make Dirty Bomb seem more like a Call of Duty clone in that regard? I am sure there are elegant solutions to make sure people do not feel the need for pay to win.

These are actually all really great ideas, Strychzilla. Sorry if I am casting doubt or seeming like a negative nancy regarding your ideas. I actually have been meaning to make a post about passives. I just want to make sure we consider all sides of this rubix cube before we start shuffling it up.

EDIT: Oh snap…Anti is already on it and replied. =]


(Hyperg) #206

Each build system will eventually have its “stars” (or cookie-cutters), despite some of the ppl playing “against” the class or coming up with weird combos. Preset loadouts would be nothing but these results, so some sort of playing with abilities and weapons will happen anyway, even if not at the player’s discretion.

It certainly is tougher on the balance part, that’s why I mentioned granularity, too much and it becomes really tedious to keep in check and more “fiddly” customization-wise. Something like strychzilla’s reference should suffice.

I think you need the archetypes tho, not just a merc with access to all, for an easier placement of your opponent in the scenario “oh s#!t, this solly’s gonna plant, etc”.

In the end, be it a loadout system like this, or the preset loadouts i mentioned, it will definitely come down to having a lot of combat-vs-utilty nuances for every archetype.


(Hundopercent) #207

[QUOTE=ImageOmega;436387]
Secondly, does this put us on the same path of Diablo 3? Since we have a limited number of points to spend and spots to fill are we really going to be just running around with cookie cutter builds? If someone is using a certain “build” are they going to be the immediate subject of ridicule because they are not as effective as build x. While I do agree that it opens the doors for more possibility, but does it really only encourage players wanting to be cookie cutter?

Finally, wouldn’t this approach really encourage the pay to win mindset? In order to have cookie cutter build x, y, or z will newer players feel they are at a disadvantage and think they have to pay in order to get the skills they need to compete (and I mean in a pub). I am sure the option to level and purchase items or skills based on in game rewards will be there, but that does not really change the fact that newer players may feel they are at a disadvantage. I know Call of Duty does do this well as far as “builds” and choosing what passives or guns you’d want or need. Does that make Dirty Bomb seem more like a Call of Duty clone in that regard? I am sure there are elegant solutions to make sure people do not feel the need for pay to win.

These are actually all really great ideas, Strychzilla. Sorry if I am casting doubt or seeming like a negative nancy regarding your ideas. I actually have been meaning to make a post about passives. I just want to make sure we consider all sides of this rubix cube before we start shuffling it up.[/QUOTE]

No need to apologize, that’s what we’re all here for to shoot the **** and figure things out.

I understand your concerns but the same can and will be applied to the presets. If xxx merc is > xxx merc than it will still feel P2W. If you want to be competitive you will need xxx merc. In comp play you will generally always see the same mercs because they’re considered the best.

The only difference is you aren’t building it yourself.


(ImageOmega) #208

[QUOTE=strychzilla;436389]No need to apologize, that’s what we’re all here for to shoot the **** and figure things out.

I understand your concerns but the same can and will be applied to the presets. If xxx merc is > xxx merc than it will still feel P2W. If you want to be competitive you will need xxx merc. In comp play you will generally always see the same mercs because they’re considered the best.

The only difference is you aren’t building it yourself.[/QUOTE]

You know an interesting advantage to having loadouts is being able to switch them on the fly as to which loadout is best or necessary at the moment. Though, I doubt it’d be necessary to switch on the fly, but more necessary based on the map about to be played. I would have to do that with some maps in BLOPS2. It just made more sense for certain items on some maps, although the game itself was so easy that you basically could have run around with the pistol and bouncing betties and top the TDM server.

I think having loadouts is also a little more clever in the regard to how MOBA’s have gods/champions. You want to play the god/champion that suits your teammates best or one that has the best synergy with a mate. It’s always more fun to have a teammate you can hold hands with as you frag others into the sunset.


(Anti) #209

How would you guys feel about characters as they are now, but modified via LoL style Runes and Talents? A sort of hybrid between what we have and what Strychzilla suggested? It’s one of the suggestions we’ve discussed recently.


(Maca) #210

That’s pretty much what I said in my post. The characters should be as they are now, but some themed customization should be allowed, not full customization like Strychzilla suggested.
Personally don’t wish to see passive buffs though.


(INF3RN0) #211

I liked Strych’s proposal as well. I think it can definitely be made to work and really allow people to have more control over how they want to play, rather than being stuck with a set build. In the end this could solve all the issues at once, so my vote is to give it a shot. We got enough variation in players here that I think we would be able to give it a good solid test run as well.


(INF3RN0) #212

Honestly I bet we could keep tweaking stuff via patches to make it work all around eventually. LoL undergoes constant changes to help smooth out OP stuff all the time. There might need to be rules established for comp sometimes if there is a balance issue, but I have faith that SD would choose to address it as a general problem. I really do see this having a lot of good potential and adding something new to the game that would be very interesting if we can get it to work smoothly. +1 on the post.


(Hundopercent) #213

If that were to be implemented the farm would have to be considerably less because honestly, if you tried to join and play League now you would be so far behind it would leave a feeling of “i’m never going to be able to catch up.”

It would also make L40’s innately stronger than L1’s (not good for comp play.)


(ImageOmega) #214

I looked at a quick vid showing what LoL Runes are as I’ve never played a game of LoL (only other mobas). So, if I am correct they are basically like “BadAss Rank/Tokens” in Borderlands 2?


While I like the idea, I am worried about how it will be implemented. Can you give us some examples of what skills/abilities would be adjusted? Like, would there be “runes” for a player to do more damage?


(ImageOmega) #215

[QUOTE=strychzilla;436408]If that were to be implemented the farm would have to be considerably less because honestly, if you tried to join and play League now you would be so far behind it would leave a feeling of “i’m never going to be able to catch up.”

It would also make L40’s innately stronger than L1’s (not good for comp play.)[/QUOTE]

This is what I am afraid of regarding implementation. Also, dependent on what skills/stats/whatever would be adjusted.


(Hundopercent) #216

[QUOTE=ImageOmega;436409]I looked at a quick vid showing what LoL Runes are as I’ve never played a game of LoL (only other mobas). So, if I am correct they are basically like “BadAss Rank/Tokens” in Borderlands 2?


While I like the idea, I am worried about how it will be implemented. Can you give us some examples of what skills/abilities would be adjusted? Like, would there be “runes” for a player to do more damage?[/QUOTE]

It’s similar but with the way LoL does it, it would literally take you well over a month before you are viable for comp play. You would need at least 10 comp ready champions and runes for all of their builds (also need to farm up to L30.) That could easily translate into DB and I would not be a fan of that at all. It pretty much locks you into a role until you get your other ones geared up. You would also steam roll anyone that doesn’t have the runes/talents that you have.I would rather buy guns, grenades, and specials that actually change the way you play your game (to fit your style) than to buy runes.


(Hyperg) #217

I’d rather see a lateral advancement system, where you gain the ability to tweak your class role, rather than all sorts of passive stuff getting stacked as you level (or even worse, spend money). Saw this to some extent in Global Agenda where every other level up you’d gain a talent point to spend in a tree, up till level 30 i think it was. All good and dandy at 30, some interesting builds were being played, but up till then you’d get ur arse handed to you, simply because your opponent had more damage, bigger pools for jetpacking power and regen, etc. So everyone was pointing fingers at the matchmaking system.

Get passives to stack but put negative values on some attributes (more damage, less hp, etc). So you start with a core class, you can sway it either way, you’re not just “adding” stuff to it as you level up and unlock slots for whatever-we-call-those-db-runes.


(INF3RN0) #218

Runes maybe aren’t necessary. I think a mastery tree would be the best thing, while runes might need to be thought out a bit more so that they aren’t just base upgrades to things like HP, Damage, etc. The mastery tree itself would simply allow someone to spec their classes towards their play style such as support, aggressor, etc. Integrate the mastery tree system with match making, where in your first 10-20 games your matched with people that have the same level as you. Having more weapon/ability alternative unlocks for each class would be much better than runes. Then instead of selling loadouts specifically, your allowing for a lot more variety within each class itself. There doesn’t need to be the risk of “best combinations” either if the spending points work in a way that the best ability perks come at the cost of having less in another skill tree; ie better heals/etc but weaker gun play. In the end perhaps the middle ground spec will be the most appealing overall, but that’s a good thing.


(INF3RN0) #219

What do you guys envision for a potential mastery tree for DB?

I’m thinking of something along the lines of:

Attack:
Creep spread reduction, head-shot damage, ammo capacity, clip size, etc

Defense:
Health, speed, jump height, etc

Utility:
Class abilities (c/d’s, execution time, etc)

The tree would function like LoL where putting equal points into every category would allow for a middle ground build, but if the really attractive stuff was desired then you would need to make some sacrifices to other areas.


(warbie) #220

I wouldn’t want skills affecting things like spread, spread recovery etc.