Wishlist related discussion

[Ozon]

Edit: this here is the place to discuss other's points from the Wishlist #4 topic, not there.
Please behave, thanks
----------

The splash damage for the nucleus and for the arrow are over exaggerated, beyond the range of the smoke, and makes it very spammy weapon.. many complaints about this.

Not this again..

No we won't nerf these weapons, because they are designed to do splash damage. If you don't like the weapons, don't have them in your map / script.

[novationx]

The splash damage for the nucleus and for the arrow are over exaggerated, beyond the range of the smoke, and makes it very spammy weapon.. many complaints about this.

Not this again..

No we won't nerf these weapons, because they are designed to do splash damage. If you don't like the weapons, don't have them in your map / script.

Killa he can share his opinion bro ... ? Besides in every other game weapons get nerfed/buffed.
In CSGO they updated the AK 10x just this year...

I also agree with what he is saying ^^

[kadaz]

Not this again..

No we won't nerf these weapons, because they are designed to do splash damage. If you don't like the weapons, don't have them in your map / script.

If you would mind, it is an update list from my previous one.

If you look at the splash damage radius, it is largely outside the "fire heat", so the prediction is hard to estimate, and easy to spam.. (or have an inner splash circle that shows fire sparks) and the nucleus should only go off if someone is touching it.. its like a sticky bomb.

See the rocket is a direct hit.. splash damage should only take partial health, and let it heal back.

Direct hit is a point.

So don't brush me off, if you don't like it, complain to someone else, unless you have constructive criticism.

My update list is for the programmers, and gamers to view with an respected opinion, thank you.

Have a good day..

[kadaz]

Now maybe you can understand why the game is not so popular, we critique all those options and have everyone try to force things in the game rather than have a respective view that the game developers try hard to please everyone and everyones opinion counts, all in matter of proper manners.

So please, before making mentions about your wishlists.. anyone can remark on it, and say hey, nice idea, or not so good idea, heres why, but no personal insults in trying to hurt the other person because they have different view on how they like the game being played, its neither stupid or dumb, people have different expectations in how to play or how they would like to see it being played.

Making a game with a wider view of options will allow the game to have some breathing room to expand and let the gamer's focus perspective grow via a server's popularity/titlepack. I see no reason to overdo someones thought, and over emphasize a point when its very easy to solutionize an idea to make the point very concise and clear so that EVERYONE understands.. and we can WAIT then try to push an idea.. Is that agreeable?

[Ozon]

Ok fine, here is why I decline the arrow to be a "direct hit only" weapon:

Side note: I do not decline nerfing at all, but it has to be in an intelligent way, like that the radius of splash damage increases on vertical velocity (if floor e.g.). In other words: Shooting from a high-elevated castle is more powerful than the combat on surface level.

- The arrow, which isn't an arrow at all, is a weapon with splash damage. It is supposed to be hurtful to enemies standing right beside the impact point. The weapon itself is strong when using in close combat, so the potential victim has to keep distance to avoid getting hit. Going on a higher level can make things easier too; for both sides. With its parabole-shaped flying curve, it is perfect for shooting at enemies on higher ground. All in all, a perfect weapon for vertical gameplay. As much as it is difficult to make direct hits, they still manage to keep the balance on gamemodes like combo, as long the maps (and its item placement) are optimal.

- When the arrow was nerfed recently, the changes resulted in a backlash. It was no longer useful for close combat due to the dodging of your opponent you have to deal with. Basically, it looked like you would drop nitrogen on the floor and the "smoke" (or particles) are of no meaning, which just travelled between the legs of your opponent. In easier understanding, the chance of hitting a pro player in close combat was like 1 of 15 (Oscillation was a great mode to test your aiming with the arrow).

- There is a difference between competetive gamemodes like Combo and Battle, Royal, Melee and so on. If the Battle map, as an example, has arrow pads right next to the poles and important spots, it is not a good map. I experienced this a lot (especially with c.2 maps, bah) when it looked like this:



As you can see, the casual rocket player has no chance against the arrow guy. For a good combat between those two, this is needed: less height difference, better path buildling, faster access or flee.



This is a better solution. Equal chances in battle and else. Yes, I am blaming some maps to not do the best with the arrowpads. I have seen really awful spots with e.g. Nucleus tunnel next to every pole, aswell as arrow pads, nuclae tunnels in the only center section avaiable to go through (Battle).


Combo is different, since it kind of depends on the item placement of the arrows. A normal Combo map has 2 arrows each 45 seconds. For some it may be too much. But if their placement is seperated enough, the gameplay can be really tricky often: If you know your opponent has the arrow, you have to set your cards on the Laser and the Rockets to win over him. It is not as easy as it sounds, but by far a legitimate way of playing the gamemode. Combo is so far, with these arrows, the most balanced gamemode to date, since it depends on speed, aiming, reaction and most importantly, the timing. Many combo maps are vertical and lasers tend to camp on higher spots. Nucleus alone is too easy to hide from, while the arrow can hit those guys; even if you can't see them, but know that they are "there".

- Small concourse to the nucleus: The nucleus is slow, can be destroyed by laser easily and reloads very slow too. Why should it be nerfed more by making it "on hit only". I can not support the phrase "It should only count on direct hit", because that is not effective enough; people will most likely stop using the nucleus. But the Nucleus is a good weapon already: Slow firerate, but effective, while the Rocket is the opposite.

- To this quote:

So please, before making mentions about your wishlists.. anyone can remark on it, and say hey, nice idea, or not so good idea, heres why, but no personal insults in trying to hurt the other person because they have different view on how they like the game being played, its neither stupid or dumb, people have different expectations in how to play or how they would like to see it being played.

Noone "personally" insulted you. If your ideas of nerfing the arrow are your belief, then it's completely fine. You have to expect people not supporting you. Bring up the facts and - more importantly - your experiences and explain more.

So don't brush me off, if you don't like it, complain to someone else, unless you have constructive criticism.

Ugh it insults me personally that people decline my opinion, better be angry.

Why don't you create the nerfed weapons yourself in the action maker and put them into your script, try it out, present it, done! Nadeo rolled out the carpet already, you just need to put on your shoes and tie a knot.

I have come to a point where I believe that wanting his own ideas getting through has become a bigger competition than playing this game itself. Yes, I said competition. It is true and your (and, don't worry, also many others' ) posts prove it. People get pissed, start insulting, throwing bananas at each other and the list goes on. If someone stands up and says "Hey, I don't like this idea" or "hey man, we had this before, please don't summon it again" he gets called out like someone who would murder people for the sake of the game (lol).

Killa he can share his opinion bro ... ?

And I can share my opinion bro... ?
Sorry man, but that line was plain stupid, 3/10 made me reply.

Besides in every other game weapons get nerfed/buffed.

Because they have over 40 weapons, a million player big playerbase and - more importantly - a more complex weapon system. We have 4 weapons. Also: Shootmania is not comparable to Counter Strike in any way.

Making a game with a wider view of options will allow the game to have some breathing room to expand and let the gamer's focus perspective grow via a server's popularity/titlepack.

I agree with that; but not in correlation to the arrow subject. For beginners, the arrow is already hard enough to learn (I guess), so I think it should be fair to have 2 easy weapons (nucleus, arrow) and more powerful, but more difficult weapons (rocket, laser). It rather restricts, than opens. Really, I remember one night after the arrow-nerf, when we played Cardmelee together. Normally, everyone would take the arrow if he could. But it turned out to be the weakest weapon at that time, since it was only for direct hits, which is difficult on small maps where your enemies strafe around quickly.


Also, please don't take things here so personally kadaz. It is the internet, and I believe most of the people do not really mean to hurt you in any way.. just imagine, that when you are getting replied, it's like sitting in a pub, when someone wants to start a discussion with no bad manners.
Have a good day too, by the way.

[Dommy]

I got an idea

What if Arrow radius is changing with height difference between shoot position and hit position?

1. Shooter is higher > narrow radius
2. Same height > medium radius
3. Shooter is lower > large radius

[UrinStein]

Side note: I do not decline nerfing at all, but it has to be in an intelligent way, like that the radius of splash damage increases on vertical velocity (if floor e.g.). In other words: Shooting from a high-elevated castle is more powerful than the combat on surface level.

What if Arrow radius is changing with height difference between shoot position and hit position?

1. Shooter is higher > narrow radius
2. Same height > medium radius
3. Shooter is lower > large radius

So you've basically got the same idea as he got, just the other way round.
They both would emphasise the verticality of the weapon, which makes a lot of sense to me.

I can't tell which of these possibilities would be better, because I never play any mode with arrows, but killa's just feels a lot more natural and logical.

[novationx]

I got an idea

What if Arrow radius is changing with height difference between shoot position and hit position?

1. Shooter is higher > narrow radius
2. Same height > medium radius
3. Shooter is lower > large radius

I wonder how this would feel.
Its too complex... no? Even when I look at the image I need to think rly hard... I dont have time think when I game...

[Ozon]

Fair enough. Your idea makes more sense.