Rahdo's words - what happened here?

(Nexolate) #881

There’s a fine line between multiple values, and 1,500 per gun.
You’ve misunderstood the quote you’re making, as it’s 1,500 for all weapons.

The actual number for accuracy is 97 values.

Regards,
Nexo

(Crytiqal) #882

Good find, I knew this quote was somewhere but couldn’t be bothered searching for it

(tokamak) #883

[QUOTE=RabidAnubis;375636]Let me find the quote.

And just to give you a few thoughts,

There are multiple values of accuracy.

First!

-When you are crouched.
-When you are moving
-Recovery speed from sprinting
-Recovery spreed from shooting
-how fast it expands
-How the bullet spread is
-downed fire
-Body type
-Right after completing a parkour movement
-Jumping!
-Right after reloading
-When YOU are hit
-When you are aiming in
-When you aren’t aiming in

I can’t think of anymore, but some of those would have more values. (For instance, body type would be 3 values.)[/QUOTE]
I get that, and you could put min, max, acceleration and median values (because these parameters rarely change linearly in games these days) for each of those stances in it as well and you would probably approach 150 if you’re pushing it, not 1500.

EDIT: Right 97 it is then. Cheers.

(.Chris.) #884

Was lots of stuff in the ET:QW weapon files, can imagine it would indeed be a lot to go through and try balance.

(tokamak) #885

Still it would seem like loads of fun to me. This is where the real gameplay is defined. Endlessly fine-tuning to get the most interesting shoot-outs possible. If I could I would indeed be sitting there all day helping to tweak.

Especially considering they already nailed it in ETQW they could just take their cues from that and start with something near those values test from there. That’s less trial and error.

(zenstar) #886

Is it just me or does 97 values per weapon seem over-complicated?
I mean it feels like there should be 10 - 20 variables that are weapon specific. Maybe a handfull of global variables based on class (maybe a default set that each individual weapon modifies up / down). But 97?
Seems a bit too much for the end result to me.
How many variables does a normal fps weapon have?

(shirosae) #887

[QUOTE=zenstar;375696]Is it just me or does 97 values per weapon seem over-complicated?
I mean it feels like there should be 10 - 20 variables that are weapon specific. Maybe a handfull of global variables based on class (maybe a default set that each individual weapon modifies up / down). But 97?
Seems a bit too much for the end result to me.
How many variables does a normal fps weapon have?[/QUOTE]

IIRC, the same set of 20 or so values are repeated for each stance/motion, standing, crouched, running, sprinting, sliding, etc.

(tokamak) #888

It totally depends on what you can do. Q3 only has a handful of variables because there’s no spread (or maybe one type of spread for a couple of guns) let alone dynamic spread, so the only thing that is variable is the max amount of shots, the damager per shot and the rate of fire. Brink has walk, run, sprint, slide, jump/smart, momentum building, laying down, being hit (and I guess being hit in multiple stances).

You think of variables visible to the public, like recovery, range, damage, and such. But each of those variables consist of much more variables. ‘Range’ for example doesn’t only tell the rate at which the damage decreases, but also the curve in which it decreases. Many of these variables are exponential curves and need more than just one value to describe it’s function.

Exponential curves allow you to truly define the character of the weapon and fit it in it’s right niche. Mediocre weapons usually have a more linear inclined function so they fit in more situations while specialist weapons have highly exponential curves in their variables which ensures they won’t treat outside what they’re intended to do.

You really need these variables to ensure a diverse set of weapons that fit the different behaviour you can have in a game like Brink.

(zenstar) #889

Fair enough.
I still get the feeling that most people wouldn’t have noticed a blanket “x% reduction to variables” when in Y position instead of repeating the same variables for each different position.
Comfortably folds down a lot of variables into a smaller, neater package. Admittedly you can have more customization with more variables but I doubt many people notice the subtle differences.
Ah well. Don’t really have any more to say on it. Just glad I’m not the one tweaking that mess of numbers.

(tokamak) #890

You can’t do an overall tweak that easily, flat changes would be mild for one weapon but huge for another. Guns have different specialities, so a weapon that has a wide spread to compensate it’s high damage would receive a huge boost over a weapon with low spread and low damage to compensate.

If you take a general direction, in this case higher accuracy, then all weapons would need to be compensated positively and negatively to keep their relative balance to each other.

(zenstar) #891

[QUOTE=tokamak;375712]You can’t do an overall tweak that easily, flat changes would be mild for one weapon but huge for another. Guns have different specialities, so a weapon that has a wide spread to compensate it’s high damage would receive a huge boost over a weapon with low spread and low damage to compensate.

If you take a general direction, in this case higher accuracy, then all weapons would need to be compensated positively and negatively to keep their relative balance to each other.[/QUOTE]

I think you’re misreading what I said / I didn’t type it out clearly:

What I meant was a variable that marked a bonus for being in a state for each weapon.
So the ABC123 would have crouchbonus: +10% and then when crouching apply the bonus to all the default “standing” variables instead of having seperate standing and crouching variables for all the different knobs on the gun.

That would serverely reduce the number of variables required for each weapon and make tweaking easier.
TBH I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s what happens anyway. Find the right standing numbers and then apply a known percentage to generate the crouching numbers (repeat for all different positions the player can be in).

(tokamak) #892

Yeah I got what you meant, it’s common sense that 10% across the board doesn’t apply to all the variables and that you meant the sub variables.

But even there some nuance is required. Some weapons are good while being mobile and others are not. So even for the different stances you need different tweaks.

And sure they may already be doing that for entire groups.

As for a second point. No, Brink’s weapons aren’t really varied, this is because the low accuracy on most of them obscures any difference they may have otherwise.

(zenstar) #893

[QUOTE=tokamak;375725]Yeah I got what you meant, it’s common sense that 10% across the board doesn’t apply to all the variables and that you meant the sub variables.

But even there some nuance is required. Some weapons are good while being mobile and others are not. So even for the different stances you need different tweaks.

And sure they may already be doing that for entire groups.

As for a second point. No, Brink’s weapons aren’t really varied, this is because the low accuracy on most of them obscures any difference they may have otherwise.[/QUOTE]

Fair enough. I’ll agree with you on your points here.
So we’re in a catch 22:

if the weapons were more accurate then we’d actually really feel the effect of these 97 variables but then we’ve got campsniping and OHKs and with the size of the levels defence would own even more than they do.

Maybe there should be a set of variables for defence and offence -_- I jest (mostly).

(tokamak) #894

There’s a middleground and ETQW holds it.

Maybe there should be a set of variables for defence and offence -_- I jest (mostly).

Don’t give Wolfnemesis any ideas haha.

(wolfnemesis75) #895

[QUOTE=tokamak;375734]Don’t give Wolfnemesis any ideas haha.[/QUOTE][thread=29936] Deadpool [/thread] (Leverage) :slight_smile:

(zenstar) #896

I think ETQW hold it by having fewer weapons / class designated weapons.

The more weapons you add the more difficult it is to A: balance them (especially with the more variables you add to define the weapon) and B: make them feel unique.

I actually got a bit of “option paralysis” when it came to choosing weapons when I started. I still haven’t tried every single one.

(tokamak) #897

Oh ETQW could easily have had more weapons, it wasn’t really needed as each niche was filled. The low count fitted the clear-cut approach (IE, extreme vehicles, and abilities).

Take Raven Shield, highly lethal in it’s variables but a large selection of very different weapons. Especially range, accuracy and recovery defined them. Not saying R6 gameplay fits Brink, just that it’s possible.

(Verticae) #898

ETQW has a good 27 different weapons though.

(tokamak) #899

16 weapons. Things like EMP and Frags aren’t counted in Brink either.

(zenstar) #900

That is true now that I think about it… it just felt like less since it was class specific.