Post’s too long and this forum doesn’t offer much in formatting. Head over to SplashDamage’s for easier reading.
http://forums.warchest.com/showthread.php/46111-sick6-newb-s-feedback-post-v2
Alternative reddit discussion: https://www.reddit.com/r/Dirtybomb/comments/3mhpci/sick6_newbs_feedback_post_v2/
I was about to post that.
I agree on almost everything, besides ideas about giving less information on the C4’s state or an enemy’s health. You pretty much nailed everything in DB, which is not surprising for such a good player. The ideas are interesting, and I really approve everything you said about balancing.
everything suggested must be for the best because hes good and on sick6…
maybe splashdamage should hire this guy as a developer because all his ideas are gold.
yes, this is sarcasm
[quote="[ F² ! MADCAP ];87425"]everything suggested must be for the best because hes good and on sick6…
maybe splashdamage should hire this guy as a developer because all his ideas are gold.
yes, this is sarcasm[/quote]
Such as? I’m more than happy to discuss and argue over points, but at the very least try and make an effort. If you inherently disagree with everything I said… point out to me where and why I’m wrong. If you’re just here to be a dick… good for you.
[quote=“fubar;87432”]Such as? I’m more than happy to discuss and argue over points, but at the very least try and make an effort. If you inherently disagree with everything I said… point out to me where and why I’m wrong. If you’re just here to be a dick… good for you.
[/quote]
i actually agree with alot of what you said, not all, but alot. i was mainly just saying what i said because i see way to often where people just agree with someone because of their name being known. i was pretty much mocking all the people who just agree because they know someone is good. if someone unknown had made some of these suggestions, it would be bashed immediately.
[quote=“Eox;87399”]I was about to post that.
I agree on almost everything, besides ideas about giving less information on the C4’s state or an enemy’s health. You pretty much nailed everything in DB, which is not surprising for such a good player. The ideas are interesting, and I really approve everything you said about balancing.
[/quote]
But I don’t really agree on the suggestion to potentially turn Proxy mines invisible. They are super easy to identify currently though, cutting the audio would help it a lot. Perhaps re-add the visuals and audio of proxy mines via the augment used to increase the effect?
[quote=“triteCherry;87478”][quote=“Eox;87399”]I was about to post that.
I agree on almost everything, besides ideas about giving less information on the C4’s state or an enemy’s health. You pretty much nailed everything in DB, which is not surprising for such a good player. The ideas are interesting, and I really approve everything you said about balancing.
[/quote]
But I don’t really agree on the suggestion to potentially turn Proxy mines invisible. They are super easy to identify currently though, cutting the audio would help it a lot.
[/quote]
Which is exactly what I suggested. 
I just expanded that, if they’re still not “good enough” after having had their glowy “HI IM HERE” disco lights and sound removed, an alternative could be using the ET approach. No where do I say we should jump from to the other immediately. It’s just an idea.
Yup, I agree on the audio portion as it’s easier to pinpoint them through walls where as it would be harder to determain that with visuals alone. Visually they arn’t horrible to see without the lights but I pretty much play on max settings so I’ll have to test how much easier they might be seen on low settings without the fluff. Starting with the removal of audio then visual if need be, the baby step approach which helps if something ****s up.
They’re harder to see with my config, and I’d imagine low settings too, as I have dynamicshaders (the glow you see around healing stations, landmines, etc) turned off. Still way too easily spotable. It just stands out way too much.
But then again, a lot of people have issues spotting an “invisible” phantom.
I really disagree with “Nader direct hits close range” as that would make it impossible for almost every merc to fight a Nader on close range without being instakilled by a nade. You barely have to predict movement at those ranges and getting hits is insanely easy.
Also disagree with reducing the c4 timer to 35 seconds. It would be great imo if it would only be reduced to 35 for secondary objectives but for primary objectives it would be way too easy for attackers to just plant, set up on the other side of the map, and then spam nades on top of it so it can’t be defused.
Completely agree with everything else listed.
[quote=“AggressiveHamster;87529”]
Also disagree with reducing the c4 timer to 35 seconds. It would be great imo if it would only be reduced to 35 for secondary objectives but for primary objectives it would be way too easy for attackers to just plant, set up on the other side of the map, and then spam nades on top of it so it can’t be defused.
Completely agree with everything else listed. [/quote]
35 seconds may not sound like a lot, but it is. It’s more than enough time for you to challenge the plants TWICE. Not mentioning the fact that they need to get past you to plant in first place.
35 seconds on secondaries wouldn’t make a difference, at all. It takes 10-15 seconds, 20 tops to take it completely down with explosive spam - from a safe distance. Why bother planting?
word!
most high level (50+) competitive players said the same. so there must be some true, eh?
[quote=“fubar;87537”]
If you get more than 1 shot off with the Grenade Launcher, in close combat, and guarantee me a direct hit - every time, before being killed. Go play the lottery. [/quote]
I’ve never played against good/top tier players in DB so my opinion on this is likely to be a bit off. Can understand that it might be a more necessary change for competitive players though.
Maybe it’s a better idea for SD to implement the feature to change stuff like the bomb timer when creating a private match rather than changing it for the entire game. There’s no way in hell a bunch of randoms in MM or people playing in casual will manage to defuse c4 within 35 seconds. Would also make it easier in case tourney organizers want to have different rules for w/e reason.
“I believe the timer on C4 explosives could benefit from a small buff. 35 seconds perhaps.
This would promote more side objectives actually being planted”
You’re slightly contradicting yourself here.
It would definitely make a massive difference for current MM and casual. And if it really doesn’t matter that much for actual high-level play there’s no real reason not to implement it for at least secondary objectives.
I might have been a bit wrong regarding my opinion about Naders direct hits due to not having played against too much good players, but reducing the c4 timer to 35 seconds would be way too major of a change. If people really want it there should just be more options during the creation of private matches so it will be possible to play that way without negatively affecting the rest of the player base.
Thank you for posting this, excellent post.
I seriously cannot wait for demos. It is so upsetting knowing that a version of demo recording is already in the game as well. It obviously isn’t an important issue among balancing and bug squashing, but it is definitely something I hope the devs keep in mind.
This game also NEEDS to be more open to the community overall in order for it to really gain the popularity it deserves. If this happens, I cannot wait for someone to come up with a “DBpro” mod which would likely become the staple for competitive play.
Nailed it tbh. As far as competitive play goes anyway. Most of it applies globally though.