Splash Damage - You better not do this!

(DarkangelUK) #101

An advantage is the superiority in elevation which one side enjoys over the opposing element, if all have access to the gun with the highest stats to begin with, then there is no advantage. At the risk of repeating myself… unless the pre-order gun has the highest stats, then there is no advantage of superior stats to be had.

(tokamak) #102

Superiority in elevation can be achieved through having a gear that is better adjusted to the task and your own requirements.

(DarkangelUK) #103

I’ll let you carry on now, me and brick wall are away out for a pint… you have fun now, y’hear? When you’re done scraping that barrel, there’s a few more behind the sheds that could use a clean out.

(tokamak) #104

That’s fine, if you’re unable to deal with that argument then there’s no point in taking this further. Rather that than the continuous attempts on dragging this to a personal level.

(DarkangelUK) #105

You can only fight ignorance with ignorance, and well… it could be worse… I could be telling everyone that they should be feeling how I feel and in awe that they could possibly have a difference of opinion. You failed before you started dude… just like in every debate you enter. The minute you stop being objective and start thinking you’re never wrong, is the minute you lose any respect towards your opinion. Delusions indeed…

As i said… grow up.

(tokamak) #106

I’ve picked up your analogies and arguments and responded to them. Yet still you refuse to deal with the argument that having more options offers higher adaptability other than just repeating the same mantra. Instead you rather argue over the discussion itself. I’ve encountered this so bloody often in different situations; People are cornered in a debate and the only thing they can respond with is accusations of ‘you think you’re always right don’t you?’ and then proceed with attempts to cause drama as a way to bail out of the discussion, probably hoping to get threads locked so the issue won’t be brought up again for a while.

I’m only here to discuss, deal with the arguments rather than attempt to turn this into a soap opera. If you want to fling mud, fling it over pm’s.

(SockDog) #107

:eek: Could I just say I agree with Tok. It doesn’t happen often. :slight_smile:

It’s a much smaller step between offering something for purchase/pre-order that does have a dramatic effect on play than it is making the decision to allow altered weapons/items in the first place. Where you have companies like Activision and EA looking to prevent resale and encourage premium purchases it won’t be long before they give you an exclusive ‘magnum quick load’ in that $90 collectors edition.

Frankly I find it sad that gamers are so easily bought off and blissfully ignorant to the point they actually encourage this kind of stuff. It’s like we switched from this entitlement phase right into blind servitude at any price.

(DarkangelUK) #108

There is no debate, you don’t understand the logic behind an advantage, you claim they’re being sold when they’re not, and you can’t seem to comprehend that the gun that has lesser stats than other guns doesn’t have an advantage over those that access to more powerful guns and seem disillusioned that choice = advantage. There’s not much that can help you there clearly. And when you’re stuck in an ignorant rut and can’t see beyond your own text, I’m afraid you’ve only got yourself to blame when it comes to thinking you’re always right. The fact most ‘debates’ you’re involved in descend in the exact same manor should be a testament to the fact that you can’t argue with ignorance… any more than twice is pattern rather than a coincidence.

(Apples) #109

apples grabs popcorn

(potkettleblack) #110

I really dont see whats hard to understand about what tokamak is saying.

Its not about better stats, its about stats that determine the scenario that gun is best used for.
The more options you have, the more scenarios you can cover.

(SockDog) #111

Share or GTFO! :slight_smile:

(Apples) #112

Indeed!

A big thank you for that!

(Nikto) #113

perhaps having more options is an advantage. but then again it’s only an advantage in the big picture, it wouldn’t matter in any map where he doesn’t use it, it’d only matter in that one map, where that gun would be best suited for his gamestyle. IF there is even a map where it would suit him.

if you ask me your making a big problem out of a really small, and to some people even invisibly small, problem.
it isn’t even a balancing issue, since the guns themselves ARE balanced. it’s just the balance of the players right?
but, i seriously doubt having one more gun as an option, gives you such a big advantage that people would complain about it. i’d find it more viable if they complained about it, simply because they can’t have that cool looking gun. and if you keep this arguing over such a minor thing up, i’m gonna believe your complaining because you want that cool looking gun aswell, but don’t want to take the risk of pre-ordering and not liking the end product…

(LyndonL) #114

Solution: Kill the person with that unbalanced gun, and take it yourself. BAZINGA!!!

(DarkangelUK) #115

[QUOTE=potkettleblack;244761]I really dont see whats hard to understand about what tokamak is saying.

Its not about better stats, its about stats that determine the scenario that gun is best used for.
The more options you have, the more scenarios you can cover.[/QUOTE]

ok, just for ****s and giggles I had a think about this ‘situational advantage’ and compared it to my original statement that was ‘if any of the stock guns have better overall stats than the pre-order guns then there is no advantage’.

If a situation calls for a gun with high ROF - if there’s a stock gun that has a higher ROF than the pre-order then there is no advantage.
If a situation calls for low spread - if a stock gun has a lower spread, no advantage.
If it calls for a higher ROD - If there’s a stock gun that has it, then no advantage.

If a pre-order gun has a higher stats than all 3, then it doesn’t exist as SD said specifically that there is no best overall gun for all situations… and in that case they would be liars. The only flaw in any situation is the gun choice by the player, and if the pre-order isn’t the best equipped for said situations, then they have no advantage. You could have a million pre-order guns to my 3, if the situation calls for high ROF/ROD or low spread and each of my 3 fulfill the purpose better than your million then you have no advantage over me.

What price? It’s free with pre-order. People will easily go out and pay extra for a collectors edition, because people want something that others don’t have. You get this for free with a pre-order, why is it such a stretch to have it in virtual merchandise?

(H0RSE) #116

[QUOTE=potkettleblack;244761]I really dont see whats hard to understand about what tokamak is saying.

Its not about better stats, its about stats that determine the scenario that gun is best used for.
The more options you have, the more scenarios you can cover.[/QUOTE]
This only applies if the stats on the gun are different enough to stand out from every other gun - which I doubt it will. You and Toka seem to be arguing like you already know the stats of the weapon are “better.” You also seem to think that the pre-order guns are primary, use most of the time, guns but they are not - they are both pistols.

I don’t exactly know how picking up enemies guns will work. I mean, what if a Light player walks over a minigun?

(tokamak) #117

Thanks for taking on the issue again. Appreciated.

They’re being sold, albeit it not through direct transactions. Using them as promotional material (be it through pre-order or competitions or to attract people to your booth) is a form of selling the game, at least it’s letting external factors have an impact on the in-game balance, which is principally wrong.

and you can’t seem to comprehend that the gun that has lesser stats than other guns doesn’t have an advantage over those that access to more powerful guns

I said exactly that numerous times. Please be aware of my points as I don’t want to keep repeating myself. The problem only appears at equal or more valuable options.

and seem disillusioned that choice = advantage.

It is. It will always be an advantage, it has been an advantage as long as life exists. The more choice, the better your ability to adapt and adjust, the better your chances on the battlefield.

There’s not much that can help you there clearly. And when you’re stuck in an ignorant rut and can’t see beyond your own text, I’m afraid you’ve only got yourself to blame when it comes to thinking you’re always right.

Just respond to the arguments I use to demonstrate that having more options is an advantage.

The fact most ‘debates’ you’re involved in descend in the exact same manor should be a testament to the fact that you can’t argue with ignorance… any more than twice is pattern rather than a coincidence.

I think it’s rather a testament to people having a finite stretch of reasonableness before they start causing drama.

[QUOTE=Nikto;244768]perhaps having more options is an advantage. but then again it’s only an advantage in the big picture, it wouldn’t matter in any map where he doesn’t use it, it’d only matter in that one map, where that gun would be best suited for his gamestyle. IF there is even a map where it would suit him.

if you ask me your making a big problem out of a really small, and to some people even invisibly small, problem.
it isn’t even a balancing issue, since the guns themselves ARE balanced. it’s just the balance of the players right?
but, i seriously doubt having one more gun as an option, gives you such a big advantage that people would complain about it. i’d find it more viable if they complained about it, simply because they can’t have that cool looking gun. and if you keep this arguing over such a minor thing up, i’m gonna believe your complaining because you want that cool looking gun aswell, but don’t want to take the risk of pre-ordering and not liking the end product…[/QUOTE]

That’s a respectable viewpoint. I don’t agree with your standards but that’s a matter of taste. At least you concede that it is actually an advantage, just not big enough to make the practice of selling advantages unacceptable.

I happily grant people an exclusive cool looking gun as long as there’s an (inferior looking) one that has the exact same stats. I guess the reason I’m picky about this is that I’m from a Rainbow Six background where small differences in gun properties did matter.

Did you even read any of my posts? A better weapon would be completely outrageous, I’m arguing against equal guns, against having a bigger arsenal than other players, which sadly most people seem to be fine with.

(DarkangelUK) #118

I’m quite ok with even as well, but we’ve settled that there will be no even ground, only balanced. If there’s guns that have higher ROF, ROD or lower spread than the pre-order guns then it’ll never be equal. The middle ground would be another stat making up for the shortcomings, so a pre-order gun has slightly less ROF but slightly higher ROD… the increased ROF on the stock gun would make up for the shortcomings of the ROD. But if everything’s balanced, then there’s no advantage to speak of… and I’m sure you can agree we all strive for balance, and that’s the absolute best case scenario you’re going to get if you pre-order… that’s obviously if my original statement is upheld.

(SockDog) #119

I wasn’t being strictly literal regarding price nor specific to Brink or this thread. My point was that people have gone from expecting everything to being in some blind state of gratitude for anything. Sure in this case there is no direct financial cost but the ‘price’ is instead levied against the gameplay of the game. As such people are prepared to get a shiny pew pew regardless of whether there is some (however minor) impact on the fairness of the game.

I don’t disagree that this is blown out of proportion but then I also recognise that these minor, tiny, inconsequential things do sometimes blossom into game breaking stuff like DLC map packs. I mean, new maps went from everyone getting maps in patches to DLC paks which splintered the community into haves, need to haves because my friends have it and have nots. The picture is bigger than the immediate gain and frankly it p*sses me off to high heaven when I see how spineless and short sighted gamers are as consumers.

(tokamak) #120

Good, we’re on the same page here. Let’s assume that each gun has an equal amount of ‘points’ to divide over the properties, making them all equal in value but diverse in features. That way we can put down the cases of inferior and superior options, which is something we both don’t seem interested in discussing.

But if everything’s balanced, then there’s no advantage to speak of…

Agreed, the guns don’t offer an advantage by themselves. It’s having a wider range in guns that is the advantage. Having more choices means that you are able to pick the weapon that fits the situation the best, or even the one that fits your personal taste more often.

Compare it to mouse sensitivity. Currently you’re used to being able to set your sensitivity very precisely, but imagine you only had a few settings. Would having 3 settings (the 3 archetypes, low, medium, high)have a higher or lower chance to meet the sensitivity you require than having 4 or 5 settings? I’m sure you would agree that the higher the amount of settings the better, even if the initial 3 settings are very diverse.

and I’m sure you can agree we all strive for balance, and that’s the absolute best case scenario you’re going to get if you pre-order… that’s obviously if my original statement is upheld.

Then, taking this particular case aside, do you think that external events like promotions should be able to influence the gameplay (not just the cosmetics) itself?

Extra map packs for such high prices are bad, it’s a nasty trick to let people succumb to peer pressure or be left behind, but it’s not as bad as meddling with the internal balance of the game.