Balancing?

[Trauma.au 10]

I made a ticket regarding DAGR balance, view here.

[progamer 14]

I made a ticket regarding DAGR balance, view here.

You understand this thread is discussion against artificial balance?

And I'm trying to discuss something but you just advertise your ticket, which isn't valid for this discussion!

---------- Post added at 03:20 ---------- Previous post was at 02:55 ----------

I found this from an interview and thought i would put it in the appropriate thread:

"AI and weapons balancing are not yet final. Karel Morický explained to the fact that the opponents are often still too powerful, which is indeed due to the realism of high-tech weapons, but does not lead to a satisfactory balance for the player. The optimization of strength of arms, ballistics and the AI ​​is therefore high on the to-do list for the programming. Karel Morický explains, "The previous community feedback shows two extremes one hand there are the players who speak out for the highest possible degree of realism in the game..

You have no problem to invest several hours in order to position their sniper perfect, then leave a shot that ends the mission. On the other hand, there are many players who want to experience the purest action fireworks after a few seconds like a mission, with as much bombast. We believe that the middle ground is the best option. We try to use graphics and effects to give the player more the feeling of being in the middle of an action-packed battle without sacrificing our commitment to realistic as possible gameplay. This requires a careful optimization and should be fun in the end. "

From: http://www.pcgames.de/Arma-3-PC-236876/News/Arma-3-Vorschau-Teil-1-Szenarien-KI-Missionen-1081313/

I used google to translate it, and also the video shows some awesome new content!.

---------- Post added at 02:01 ---------- Previous post was at 01:55 ----------

Is the dev talking about player vs AI or player vs player or both?

What I get from this is that is they think realism makes weapons too powerful and thus they have to "balance them"?

A dev comment on this would clear up a lot of confusion and lessen the next few pages of rage posts.

[Trauma.au 10]

You say in your OP that you want more realism... that's exactly what that ticket is about, it's also about balance, that's what this thread is about (the title gives that away). You also claim that Arma is a sim, Arma is not a sim, not even close to being a sim. It's an authentic game, nothing more.

[progamer 14]

You say in your OP that you want more realism... that's exactly what that ticket is about, it's also about balance, that's what this thread is about (the title gives that away). You also claim that Arma is a sim, Arma is not a sim, not even close to being a sim. It's an authentic game, nothing more.

The title and first posts were created a while ago, if you read more than just the name of the thread, it's about not balancing the game, read the posts from then till now. The discussion is against balancing the game and especially against what the information I posted which from an interview with the devs states weapons are too realistic and that makes them too unbalanced and they want to change that and they want to make the game more fun for your average run and gun cod player. The statement completely is against what 90% of the community thinks. Arma will never be VBS3 but it should not go down the normal balanceing that fps games do these days. Most people also don't have a spare $3000 dollars lying around for VBS2 in which non of there freinds can afford to play with them.

---------- Post added at 03:40 ---------- Previous post was at 03:38 ----------

I found this from an interview and thought i would put it in the appropriate thread:

"AI and weapons balancing are not yet final. Karel Morický explained to the fact that the opponents are often still too powerful, which is indeed due to the realism of high-tech weapons, but does not lead to a satisfactory balance for the player. The optimization of strength of arms, ballistics and the AI ​​is therefore high on the to-do list for the programming. Karel Morický explains, "The previous community feedback shows two extremes one hand there are the players who speak out for the highest possible degree of realism in the game..

You have no problem to invest several hours in order to position their sniper perfect, then leave a shot that ends the mission. On the other hand, there are many players who want to experience the purest action fireworks after a few seconds like a mission, with as much bombast. We believe that the middle ground is the best option. We try to use graphics and effects to give the player more the feeling of being in the middle of an action-packed battle without sacrificing our commitment to realistic as possible gameplay. This requires a careful optimization and should be fun in the end. "

From: http://www.pcgames.de/Arma-3-PC-236876/News/Arma-3-Vorschau-Teil-1-Szenarien-KI-Missionen-1081313/

I used google to translate it, and also the video shows some awesome new content!.

---------- Post added at 02:01 ---------- Previous post was at 01:55 ----------

Is the dev talking about player vs AI or player vs player or both?

Let's get back to the discussion and the reason I posted this in this thread. Or do I have to close it and start a new one?

Edited August 2, 2013 by ProGamer

[Codeine 1]

War is not balanced.

/thread

[Trauma.au 10]

My ticket is in favor what you want, why the hate?

[progamer 14]

This just confuses me because a devs states weapons are too realistic and that makes them too unbalanced and they want to change that and they want to make the game more fun for your average run and gun cod player. But then says they use pretty graphics to make the player feel like there is more action without sacrificing realistic gameplay.

And what is their definition of "Satisfactory balance for the player" is this AI related, natural balance (like AA and aircraft), or pvp balance?

---------- Post added at 04:08 ---------- Previous post was at 04:07 ----------

My ticket is in favor what you want, why the hate?

Read your ticket, I told you why. Fix it and you have my vote.

[Trauma.au 10]

I'm confused are you for or against realism/authenticity?

[progamer 14]

I'm confused are you for or against realism/authenticity?

The wording of your ticket says the opposite of what it means...

I also have not voted on your ticket yet, but this discussion is best done in the ticket it is about for sake of forum rules.

[Trauma.au 10]

I'm gunna leave it as is, you seem to be the only person who does not understand it.

[progamer 14]

I'm gunna leave it as is, you seem to be the only person who does not understand it.

Please leave this discussion for the ticket, and please do not try to turn the discussion personal.

[EuroSlave 1]

I gotta say - nearly every gun and vehicle... well they feel exactly the same. I can't instantly tell the difference like I could back in ARMA 2

[lugiahua 26]

Why do people assume when talking about balance in arma its only about nerfing/buffing weapons and mirroring sides, there's a little more to it than that.

And judging by whats running on the servers right now the mission designers are pretty clueless, even with basic stuff.

From the NLAW and MXM cases...

NLAW supposed to be a top attack anti-armor missile, then they changed it to just an unguided and underpowered rocket because some people claimed it was "unbalanced" due to OPFOR lack of a similar weapon.

Now it's just a larger AT4, even takes multiple shots just to disable a wheeled APC.

and then we got MXM, a heave barreled rifle with bipod, but with even less accuracy than a carbine.

[progamer 14]

From the NLAW and MXM cases...

NLAW supposed to be a top attack anti-armor missile, then they changed it to just an unguided and underpowered rocket because some people claimed it was "unbalanced" due to OPFOR lack of a similar weapon.

Now it's just a larger AT4, even takes multiple shots just to disable a wheeled APC.

and then we got MXM, a heave barreled rifle with bipod, but with even less accuracy than a carbine.

The bipod thing is because of lack of resources and time. You have to understand if something is because lack of resources and time and if it isn't then you can assume its the dreaded "balance" we all fear.

[liquidpinky 11]

From the NLAW and MXM cases...

NLAW supposed to be a top attack anti-armor missile, then they changed it to just an unguided and underpowered rocket because some people claimed it was "unbalanced" due to OPFOR lack of a similar weapon.

Now it's just a larger AT4, even takes multiple shots just to disable a wheeled APC.

and then we got MXM, a heave barreled rifle with bipod, but with even less accuracy than a carbine.

You mean the same MXM that I stopped using because it was so piss easy to get multiple kills without even worrying about having to reload until I had used up 100 rounds(approx 40 kills) ?

You are right, it needs balanced.

[progamer 14]

You mean the same MXM that I stopped using because it was so piss easy to get multiple kills without even worrying about having to reload until I had used up 100 rounds(approx 40 kills) ?

You are right, it needs balanced.

Kills on what AI? Thats easy, if its players then they need to LTP. If it bugs you so much then why don't not allow that type of magazine in the mission or find a server that does do this. Liquidpinky said he/she wanted things more realistic and not artificially balanced.

---------- Post added at 22:28 ---------- Previous post was at 22:25 ----------

Why do people just go ranting off in this thread about what they think needs to "balanced" without looking at what we are discussing and adding nothing to the discussion.

[TSAndrey 1]

9mm still so awful? What's even the point in using guns with 9mm bullets?

[chortles 263]

As per prior testing questions: are you using extended armor on friendly units?

[TSAndrey 1]

As per prior testing questions: are you using extended armor on friendly units?

I can't find that option in editor. I don't know if they have extended armor...

[dale0404 5]

It is under Configure > Game > Difficulty (first option at the top).

Edited August 3, 2013 by dale0404

[liquidpinky 11]

[/color]Why do people just go ranting off in this thread about what they think needs to "balanced" without looking at what we are discussing and adding nothing to the discussion.

Wasnt intended as a rant, more of a pisstake at someone saying it was a poor weapon and just stating that the MXM is a capable weapon and one I actually find very accurate. Be it against AI or human targets.

I just stopped using at because I gained no satisfaction from kills.

[metalcraze 290]

MX SW is exactly the same weapon as MX + bipod

Yet MX still can't accept 100 bullet mags and MX SW still has no semi-auto fire

When will this get fixed?

[dmarkwick 261]

MX SW is exactly the same weapon as MX + bipod

Yet MX still can't accept 100 bullet mags and MX SW still has no semi-auto fire

When will this get fixed?

Ironic post? ;)

[progamer 14]

Ironic post? ;)

Need a ticket to get it fixed.

[Steakslim 1]

MX SW is exactly the same weapon as MX + bipod

Yet MX still can't accept 100 bullet mags and MX SW still has no semi-auto fire

When will this get fixed?

For the sole purpose of devil's advocacy, maybe the MX SW does not have a sear capable of semi auto fire vs the MX with Bipod, that is I haven't looked closely at the model to see if the selector switch for the MX SW shows an option for semi auto fire, in which case that's quite the loloops by BIS. Can't really make an excuse for the magazine other than maybe one has a magwell made to allow better feeding through a 100rnd mag (those things are troublesome, or were in real life).