Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Shield Belt A Little To Overpowered?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    All this talk about the shield belt (a necessary additional armour IMHO)> . . . why don't you do away with the UDamage and the Redeemer = totally not needed and often lead to ill feeling when used in certain circumstances? I know some will say those pickups are the only chance a noob might have in a game to get frags. Noobs always gonna get better but the UDamage and the Redeemer are always gonna piss people off! Just saying . . . .

    Comment


    • #62
      the redeemer and udamage and baserk are there azzie to CRUSH your enemies!
      Join the community Facebook page
      https://www.facebook.com/pages/Unreal-Tournament-4-Community/302380673298678

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by code187 View Post
        the redeemer and udamage and baserk are there azzie to CRUSH your enemies!
        I know . . . but skill and map control can do that effectively, too. :P

        Comment


        • #64
          Yes your right, USA could of stormed japan and controlled the map with skill but they dropped the A bomb. C>R>U>S>H
          Join the community Facebook page
          https://www.facebook.com/pages/Unreal-Tournament-4-Community/302380673298678

          Comment


          • #65

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by code187 View Post
              Yes your right, USA could of stormed japan and controlled the map with skill but they dropped the A bomb. C>R>U>S>H
              Okay so, the reason we dropped the bomb was to keep from having 2-3 times as many casualties on both sides as both bombs caused combined, but sure you can call it crush if you want... Truman would have called it a swift end to the war, and demonstration of the force we were prepared to use, even though we actually didn't have anymore A-bombs at the time.

              Originally posted by code187 View Post
              lol because the better player will win even if the less skilled has 10 shield belts
              The better player will get the shield belt 9 times out of 10 anyway, so why not worry more about balance and leveling the playing field for the losing player? No one likes getting their skull bashed against the wall over and over, and it causes people to rage quit, and inevitably causes people to not play the game.

              Now as far as free for all, team deathmatch, capture the flag, vehicle capture the flag, warfare, assault, domination go, I would say (and most of the community would agree with me) that amp/berzerk is fine... redeemer should probably be kept to warfare/vctf, and maybe even assault in some circumstances.

              Regardless of all this talk of amp/berzerk and/or redeemers/nukes, we're getting off topic yet again...

              Does anyone have a better solution to the issue with the shield belt being broken/overpowered?

              The way I see it we have a few options to fix it, we have:

              A. The shield belt could tick down over time like armor over 100 in quake, or like the overshield in halo

              B. The shield belt needs to be reduced to 100 instead of 150 (at least for duel maybe not in other game modes)

              C. Belt could keep the 100% damage to health resistance, IF it's effectiveness wore down each time you took a hit, this could be animated by it flickering on and off to show that it's been damaged IE: after the first hit with say a few plasma shots, it's effectiveness would go down to 80% damage absorption, (and so on and so forth,) but a portion of that damage would go though to health similar to UT2k4 style armors and/or vest/pads/helmet but only the first hit would have that full damage protection.

              D. The belt could have a duration, like the thread creator suggested, similar to amp/berzerk

              E. could combine some or all of the above

              Personally I like the idea of belt not having a duration, but rather the effectiveness of the damage absorption getting worn down the more times you get hit, I'm also in favor of belt starting armor being 100, vest being 50, pads being 30, and helmet being 20 for a max combined armor of 200 cap. I think this would be the best resolution to the armor problem. Which would also allow for weapon nerfs to be viable, as armor would be less overpowered, so therefore weapons wouldn't need to be so overpowered to stop people who have full map control. Less spawn rape = a good thing, which is why choosing your spawn was a good change to the duel game type.

              While we're on the side note of choosing between one of two random spawns, I wouldn't mind seeing that duel feature get implemented in all game modes. It could be great in CTF (*cough* cafe, who thinks "balancing duel first won't help other game modes" *cough*) Seriously hear me out: Let's say a flag carrier is escaping, after killing a defender, playing as said defender, and being able to choose a closer to spawn to the front line, would allow a player to actually catch that flag carrier who would otherwise be long gone if you got a random spawn in the bowels of your base, and you're desperately trying to catch him with your translocator having no time to pick up a weapon to fight with in the process.

              I imagine your typical argument would be that it would be much harder to get a flag across the map, and isn't that where teamwork and skill come into play? isn't it suppose to be hard to get the flag across the map? Personally I prefer to work for my victory points as opposed to having things handed to me like free wins because I control an overpowered shield belt. Just sayin...
              Last edited by Dr.ToxicVenom; 07-28-2015, 06:58 PM. Reason: minor corrections
              Trust me, I'm a doctor.

              Dr.ToxicVenom: "How bout we duel, and let our skill decide who's right and who's wrong? I'm in Unreal Carnage [Dallas] Right now. Come join."
              MonsOlympus: "How about you work your way up the ranks first then we'll talk LAN, until then. Have fun trying to find people to play against you and your crappy attitude, good night!"
              Dr.ToxicVenom: "DAAAAAAMN! That dodge was almost as good as my multi-dodge. Nice!"

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by -AEnubis- View Post
                I don't agree that this is what UT3 got wrong, but I couldn't run it much over 40fps when it came out, otherwise, I probably would have played it a ton more, because I do agree with Toxic on it being the most balanced UT.
                Okay 2 things you got wrong here. I said this was a key factor, meaning there were many other reasons, this being the primary one. And disagree all you want but have you noticed how much competitive players complain about butchered aim? Latency and performance aside, if you have the frames but you still can't hit the shots, players get angry. Believe me, this is not up for debate. I played the holy **** out of UT3 and this was the biggest complaint. People simply couldn't land shots because aiming with weapons were so butchered in ways that didn't make sense. Also, there are maps in which I get 120 fps, and still do not have reliable aim. It depends on what's going on in the map (e.g. emitters, decals, dynamic lights, embedded bink videos, etc - that stuff impacts your aim a lot, even if your framerate isn't visibly suffering). You simply cannot disagree with me on this, I ran 3 duel tournaments for UT3 and brought some of the best players back to UT3 for a short while, only to have them leave due to the ridiculous handicaps to aim.

                The other thing you got wrong is that I also believe UT3 is the most balanced. Agreeing with Toxic is like agreeing with me.

                Simple damage nerfs just seems like a very 2d perspective, and a move backwards in the direction of the ticklefest that was 2kx.
                You don't need a complicated solution to fix a simple problem, and no, it's not a move backwards. 2k4 wasn't a ticklefest, it only appeared to be so because of the shield gun delaying inevitability. Can't believe I even need to mention that.

                Take rockets for example. Reducing them to 90 damage was the worst thing that ever happened to them. It pretty much made it so you had to load them at to rival any of the other weapons, not that the simple ability to load them isn't damaging enough. By slowing down the projectile, and increasing the AoE a touch, and maintaining linear falloff, you make it again like UT, so people hit with it, but it's not always so lethal. To get full damage, it was a very high skilled shot at most ranges, and risky as it got easier, when you started to pay for it in self damage. It balanced well, it maintained lethality, skill, and newbs could still hit with it. Pretty much everyone was happy, minus opponents of 6 packs.
                Yeah, okay the reduction in velocity is what made rockets in 2K4 less viable, especially against opponents with hitscan weapons, in already large scale environments, due to movement mechanics. This is one thing Toxic disagrees with me on. I do not believe a rocket should deal 100 damage direct hit. I think you should be able to survive a direct hit rocket. But whatever, this is for another discussion entirely.

                The only weapons that such a 2d perspective really applies to are the weapons that hit in literally 2d, where it's all about DPS reduction, either via rate, damage, or both.
                Arbitrary assessment.

                The problem that still remains with reducing damage, is that it still leaves the game more accuracy-centric, and less balanced with defensive movement, it just makes the accuracy check more redundant.
                Yeah, a little known thing you won't hear me say a lot is I actually believe sniper should have a damage reduction as well, especially for headshots. Just because the math is pretty (x2 damage), doesn't make it the perfect value. Seems odd that nobody challenges this. Actually it doesn't, because people want hitscan shots to hit hard because it's easier to aim than it is to refine strategies with movement and projectile weapons. It takes someone with huge balls to nerf the sniper in spite of the backlash it might produce. Stinger should be nerfed too. Shock primary is tolerable. You nerf things in accordance and you can maintain the fine hitscan vs projectile balance.

                Originally posted by wheredaweapons
                UT3 is like hitting a barn door in comparison.
                Okay if you've played UT3 as much as I have, and you try playing it after a decent amount of time of playing UT4, you'll quickly realize the disparity. Weapons in UT3 were borked beyond understanding--Sniper doesn't register when it should. Flak primary is insanely hard to hit with. Link: hard. Shock combos hard. I'm speaking by COMPARISON, not hard in general. There were a myriad of factors contributing to the poor reliability of UT3 weapons. UT4 is a cakewalk by comparison--and trust me, ping compensation in UT3 didn't help much. UT4 is far more enjoyable because weapons in UT4 seem to be far more reliable than in UT3 (frag fest aside). UT3 was a frag fest because of small close quarters environments, OP weapons, large radius, huge hitboxes, etc etc. Yes you're going to hit other players, but reliably/consistently hitting them is the issue UT3 had.


                Originally posted by DrToxicVenom
                Okay so first of all, it seems you took Neil's quote out of context, as I'm pretty sure he's mostly talking about hitscans in UT3, I could be miss-interpreting this as well, but we all know Bio was a lot easier to land in UT3 than in any other version of UT because the blob size was HUGE, the good factor about bio in UT3 was that it was damage over time, so it did give the player hit by it a split second to react, and grab health before it killed them.
                I wish this were the case, but it's not. Even UT3's projectile weapons are borked if you simply compare them to UT4's weapons. It's easy to forget how unreliable/inconsistent UT3 weapons were after playing UT4 for a while.

                Originally posted by DrToxicVenom
                Neil would probably still 30-0 you on DM-Rankin in UT2k4
                This ^^

                Originally posted by DrToxicVenom
                As I already said, there were many viable play styles in UT3. Yes Rockets were good for spawn kills, as well as a tipple pack for being an equalizer, but if you want to level the playing field, Bio was your go to gun for UT3. The reason the community hated UT3 had nothing to do with aim being unimportant, because regardless of your flawed opinions on the matter, aim is ALWAYS a key factor in a first person shooter. UT3 had problems out of the box, it was released as beta, and many of the serious problems that came out of the box weren't fixed until 2.0 titan patch, or 2.1 patch, by that time the game was already dead. Some major issues were never fixed, and the only way to resolve the problems were to tweak your .ini files, such as sound tweaks, or the fact that the X/Y axis when aiming your mouse was constrained and looking up/down was always slower, than looking left/right, because at it's core UT3 was designed for consoles, and ported to PC. THIS WAS A HUGE DRIVING FACTOR IN IT'S DEATH. Also another HUGE driving factor was the fact that 2kxx players could not adapt to the new style of movement because jump jump + wall dodge was too hard for their minds to grasp, as they had already driven dodge + jump into their heads and had no room left in their minds to learn anything new. They didn't want to compete with the higher damage of the rocket launcher, and moreover they instantly figured there was no counter to rockets increased blast radius without dodge jump. These were all misconceptions, but I wouldn't expect you to know this unless you were one of the highest tier players in UT3, and/or were around since day 1 and stuck around until UT4.
                Harsh, but seems pretty accurate.

                Originally posted by -AEnubis-
                Most of the time, I feel when you challenge someone to a 1v1 on the forum, it's petty, and uncalled for, but in the one case I feel you should, you don't.

                I just don't get you man lol
                Yeah, I don't get it either. This wheredaweaps guy really deserves to be taught a lesson through video game violence. It's the only way to stop these asinine assumptions.

                Originally posted by DrToxicVenom
                The better player will get the shield belt 9 times out of 10 anyway, so why not worry more about balance and leveling the playing field for the losing player? No one likes getting their skull bashed against the wall over and over, and it causes people to rage quit, and inevitably causes people to not play the game.

                Now as far as free for all, team deathmatch, capture the flag, vehicle capture the flag, warfare, assault, domination go, I would say (and most of the community would agree with me) that amp/berzerk is fine... redeemer should probably be kept to warfare/vctf, and maybe even assault in some circumstances.

                Regardless of all this talk of amp/berzerk and/or redeemers/nukes, we're getting off topic yet again...

                Does anyone have a better solution to the issue with the shield belt being broken/overpowered?

                The way I see it we have a few options to fix it, we have:

                A. The shield belt could tick down over time like armor over 100 in quake, or like the overshield in halo

                B. The shield belt needs to be reduced to 100 instead of 150 (at least for duel maybe not in other game modes)

                C. Belt could keep the 100% damage to health resistance, IF it's effectiveness wore down each time you took a hit, this could be animated by it flickering on and off to show that it's been damaged IE: after the first hit with say a few plasma shots, it's effectiveness would go down to 80% damage absorption, (and so on and so forth,) but a portion of that damage would go though to health similar to UT2k4 style armors and/or vest/pads/helmet but only the first hit would have that full damage protection.

                D. The belt could have a duration, like the thread creator suggested, similar to amp/berzerk

                E. could combine some or all of the above

                Personally I like the idea of belt not having a duration, but rather the effectiveness of the damage absorption getting worn down the more times you get hit, I'm also in favor of belt starting armor being 100, vest being 50, pads being 30, and helmet being 20 for a max combined armor of 200 cap. I think this would be the best resolution to the armor problem. Which would also allow for weapon nerfs to be viable, as armor would be less overpowered, so therefore weapons wouldn't need to be so overpowered to stop people who have full map control. Less spawn rape = a good thing, which is why choosing your spawn was a good change to the duel game type.

                While we're on the side note of choosing between one of two random spawns, I wouldn't mind seeing that duel feature get implemented in all game modes. It could be great in CTF (*cough* cafe, who thinks "balancing duel first won't help other game modes" *cough*) Seriously hear me out: Let's say a flag carrier is escaping, after killing a defender, playing as said defender, and being able to choose a closer to spawn to the front line, would allow a player to actually catch that flag carrier who would otherwise be long gone if you got a random spawn in the bowels of your base, and you're desperately trying to catch him with your translocator having no timer to pick up a weapon in to fight with in the process.

                I imagine your typical argument would be that it would be much harder to get a flag across the map, and isn't that where teamwork and skill come into play? isn't it suppose to be hard to get the flag across the map? Personally I prefer to work for my victory points as opposed to having things handed to me like free wins because I control an overpowered shield belt. Just sayin...
                I must commend you for being civil, thorough and, open to more than just 1 solution. If people can't see the value in your comprehensive and clearly thought out posts, then the problem might **not** be you.
                Last edited by CaptainMigraine; 07-28-2015, 08:04 PM.
                Contact me: (Steam: Neillithan) (E-mail: neilvmoore@gmail.com)

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by CaptainMigraine View Post


                  Okay if you've played UT3 as much as I have, and you try playing it after a decent amount of time of playing UT4, you'll quickly realize the disparity. Weapons in UT3 were borked beyond understanding--Sniper doesn't register when it should. Flak primary is insanely hard to hit with. Link: hard. Shock combos hard. I'm speaking by COMPARISON, not hard in general. There were a myriad of factors contributing to the poor reliability of UT3 weapons. UT4 is a cakewalk by comparison--and trust me, ping compensation in UT3 didn't help much. UT4 is far more enjoyable because weapons in UT4 seem to be far more reliable than in UT3 (frag fest aside). UT3 was a frag fest because of small close quarters environments, OP weapons, large radius, huge hitboxes, etc etc. Yes you're going to hit other players, but reliably/consistently hitting them is the issue UT3 had.

                  Yes there is a disparity between UT3 and UT4 regarding how easy it is to hit with weapons, I don't dispute that at all. The thing is the way you feel about UT3 towards UT4 I feel about UT99/2k4 towards UT3. Do you get that I mean?

                  I don't agree that UT4 is more enjoyable than UT3 or vice versa, both to me are in more or less the same bracket and it's a terrible benchmark to set the bar at. It's just seeing things differently, you're saying UT4 is more enjoyable because you can consistently hit with weapons. I'm saying that's the problem, there is nothing to master regarding weapon play.

                  Also with the jibez about whos better at what game I honestly don't care. To me it's what the masses think and how long the game will be around. I`ll play anyone on this forum in the original game and if they beat me that's fair enough, it's not some dickwaving contest I'm just saying my perception after playing all the games from the beginning and taking in the community reaction at those particular times.
                  Last edited by wheredaweaps; 07-28-2015, 08:11 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by wheredaweaps View Post
                    I don't agree that UT4 is more enjoyable than UT3 or vice versa.
                    Oh god, do you even know what you're missing? Do you play duels? What gametypes do you play? Besides, prealpha game man. Don't expect it to be as fun as release.
                    Contact me: (Steam: Neillithan) (E-mail: neilvmoore@gmail.com)

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      I'm not missing anything and I don't find it fun, game has a lot of problems regarding weapons/scaling/input which I hope will be rectified by the time it hits beta. I know my posts are negative I'd love to see UT be a big hitter again

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Ladies ladies ladies, let's stop with all the negativity, and just agree that people who play duel in UT, are typically pretty thugnifficent.
                        Trust me, I'm a doctor.

                        Dr.ToxicVenom: "How bout we duel, and let our skill decide who's right and who's wrong? I'm in Unreal Carnage [Dallas] Right now. Come join."
                        MonsOlympus: "How about you work your way up the ranks first then we'll talk LAN, until then. Have fun trying to find people to play against you and your crappy attitude, good night!"
                        Dr.ToxicVenom: "DAAAAAAMN! That dodge was almost as good as my multi-dodge. Nice!"

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Wait, you think by "making the weapons harder to hit with" I mean instituting random visual obstacles and input discrepancies?

                          I didn't even insinuate your opinion on UT3's balance. If players were "factually" frustrated with their inability to hit anything in UT3, due to factors like you mention, or similar, that has absolutely nothing to do with what I'm talking about. It's a completely different psychological effect when you're having trouble getting near a skill ceiling, and your dealing with environmental issues beyond your control.

                          I'm mostly just talking about slower projectiles here, and maybe not "magnetic" goo. Not lens flares and input lag.

                          I also have been quite vocal (in multiple posts) about moving to a 1.5x multiplier for sniper, at the very least of the nerfs I feel it should get if it remains hit scan, and have been a firm advocate of a projectile sniper since before UT3.

                          My biggest gripe with any shooter that isn't Tribes is the low skill ceilings on the weapons. Short of the scans, UT has been the only game to come close, and I've watched it slowly slip away for the last 15 years.
                          Originally posted by Mysterial
                          An instant hit, accurate, instant kill weapon is overpowered. There's no skill ceiling. It's limited only by the shooter's accuracy. It also severely impairs the defensive side of the game - ignoring ping, it is nearly irrelevant what your opponent does - click the right pixel and you win. Even non-instant kill instant hit weapons are often problematic - the Shock Rifle example is obvious before even getting to other games.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Getting this back on track a little..

                            Originally posted by Dr.ToxicVenom View Post
                            The better player will get the shield belt 9 times out of 10 anyway, so why not worry more about balance and leveling the playing field for the losing player?
                            Originally posted by Dr.ToxicVenom View Post
                            Does anyone have a better solution to the issue with the shield belt being broken/overpowered?
                            For duel.

                            Add meaningful out of control stacking allowing the out of control player to reduce stack differential without damage allowing them to then challenge for larger items. This has the added benefit of forcing the in control player to take the out of control players stack into consideration more rather than just playing belt+jacket. This spreads importance across more items, adds more options for both players and overall creates a more dynamic game - it allows a player to have as a similar amount of effective health without taking the belt, the cost being time spent doing it.

                            Alternatively disallow pickups of lower value armor items when stronger armors are equipped. This means a player cannot deny jacket while wearing full belt, they need to take damage or self damage to deny. This helps lower stack differential as the non-belt player either has access to the jacket or the belt player takes the jacket after damaging themselves. Belt spawn could also be lowered at the same time, forcing the belt player to revisit it more often. Sound strange? CPMA and Quakeworld use a similar system. The obvious reply to this is that it removes strategy/skill as the belted player cannot deny the jacket. I would argue that it creates a potentially deeper item game by virtue of having to play around the jacket, being aware of your opponents location and yours in relation to the jacket.

                            Those are just two ways you could give out of control players an easier time, which seems to be what you are after. All the traditional +damage methods that ut has always had still apply as well!
                            Posts are about duel unless otherwise specified. ut duel shortcomings | What is timing? | dm-twentyseven

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              So, I've removed the posts that were not more or less related to the shield belt discussion, including the "post-game analysis". It was that or close the thread completely and I'd prefer to keep the good discussion that was before, so please keep it clean.
                              "Yeah. _Lynx can fire the lightning gun, have the lightning bolt turn a 90 degree corner, stop and ask the closest teammate for directions, confuse the directions and get lost, realize it went the wrong way, make a U-Turn, and get a headshot on the intended target."
                              - RenegadeRetard

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                There is no problem like that. Games like ut are all about timing and map control. Everything is based on it. It's pretty simple that player who doing this should get the advantage. Anyway it's advantage just on the paper for now, because you can kill stacked guy in one second or two shots. I am against making belt even less important.
                                http://forum.unreal.pl/image.php?u=2...ine=1223384883
                                Polish community DISCORD server: https://discord.gg/eMRKbAg Join us if you are Polish and let's play some 4v4

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X