Results after ''Weapon Rebalancing''

[GenoIndeed]

@Bitzsam

A few things:

1: regarding a post I made a while ago, i have more guns than just a g18, I own a soiuzen and lots of other high end guns, I don't like the way they feel, which you would know if you'd actually read thru your other gun thread and the rest of that post. I clearly said its partially a personal thing when it comes to pacing, so why are you trying to turn it into an argument or some blame-game crap? I don't even like trying to talk to you on here because you act like an a-hole for no reason at times.

2: You need to stop acting like you're better than everyone just because you decided to do this. That god complex crap needs to stop, its not a good look for a staff member.

3: Why didn't you just buff the low end stuff instead of nerfing all the high end stuff? It would've made far more sense and been less of a unplanned mess. The stats don't make sense in terms of cost to performance, you nerfed stuff you didn't even plan on nerfing because of the major imbalance it caused, and all that strung from just a few "problem" weapons. Buffing the low end stuff would've been far easier and manageable, guns at all price ranges would be more desirable among more of the community and you don't change the pacing of anything.

[Key]

Lol. No offense and No Defending on sam, but i really like the nerf now, its time to move on lol, because i really use the bar for pks, then, everytime i saw ppl using the bar, such as in lethal, and bbz, they got used after a month, guys its going to be almost 2 months, and still talking on nerfs? Lol if i were you, just get over it.

[Donald]

Bar isn't the only thing that got nerfed. Nerfing peoples guns 3 years after they bought it is just cheating peoples money no matter how you try to spin it. Theres a reason why a lot of guns are no longer worth saving for the reason being is they were Blitzed by Bitz & no one would even consider touching it right now.
In the ends all guns become equally suck & we all end up Bitzscammed.

[N!chola$]

Lol. No offense and No Defending on sam, but i really like the nerf now, its time to move on lol, because i really use the bar for pks, then, everytime i saw ppl using the bar, such as in lethal, and bbz, they got used after a month, guys its going to be almost 2 months, and still talking on nerfs? Lol if i were you, just get over it.

Most pros don't use bar to base, they use psg.

[Donald]

Among game developers, Massively multiplayer online role-playing games designers are especially likely to nerf aspects of a game in order to maintain game balance.
Occasionally, a new feature (such as an item, class, or skill) may be made too powerful, unfair, or too easily obtained to the extent that it unbalances the game system. This is sometimes due to an unforeseen method of using or acquiring the object that was not considered by the developers.

Nerfs in various online games have spurred in-world protests.This impact on the economy, along with the original impact of the nerf, can cause large player resentment for even a small change. In particular, in the case of items or abilities which have been nerfed players can become upset over the perceived wasted efforts in their obtaining the now nerfed features.

In game design, balance is the concept and the practice of tuning a game's rules, usually with the goal of preventing any of its component systems from being ineffective or otherwise undesirable when compared to their peers. An unbalanced system represents wasted development resources at the very least, and at worst can undermine the game's entire ruleset by making important roles or tasks impossible to perform.

Balancing does not necessarily mean making a game fair. This is particularly true of action games: Jaime Griesemer, design lead at Bungie, said in a lecture to other designers that "every fight in Halo is unfair". This potential for unfairness creates uncertainty, leading to the tension and excitement that action games seek to deliver. In these cases balancing is instead the management of unfair scenarios, with the ultimate goal of ensuring that all of the strategies which the game intends to support are viable. The extent to which those strategies are equal to one another defines the character of the game in question.

Dynamic game difficulty balancing, also known as dynamic difficulty adjustment (DDA) or dynamic game balancing (DGB), is the process of automatically changing parameters, scenarios, and behaviors in a video game in real-time, based on the player's ability, in order to avoid making the player bored (if the game is too easy) or frustrated (if it is too hard). The goal of dynamic difficulty balancing is to keep the user interested from the beginning to the end, providing a good level of challenge.

Linking real-world and virtual economies is rare in Massively multiplayer online role-playing games , as it is generally believed to be detrimental to gameplay. If real-world wealth can be used to obtain greater, more immediate rewards than skillful gameplay, the incentive for strategic roleplay and real game involvement is diminished. It could also easily lead to a skewed hierarchy where richer players gain better items, allowing them to take on stronger opponents and level up more quickly than less wealthy but more committed players.

These are just some of the quotes courtesy of wikipedia links in description below
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerfing_(gaming)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balance_(game_design)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynami...ulty_balancing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massiv...e-playing_game

Heres why the nerfs won't work.
1. Real-world wealth can be used to obtain greater, more immediate rewards than skillful gameplay, the incentive for strategic roleplay and real game involvement is diminished.
We have Gralat packs because of that we will never prevent any of its component systems from being ineffective or otherwise undesirable when compared to their peers. That is prevention of lower tier guns from being ineffective or otherwise undesirable when compared to their peers will never be possible when real-world wealth can be used to obtain greater, more immediate rewards than skillful gameplay, the incentive for strategic roleplay and real game involvement is diminished.
Which is why your attempt to balance management of unfair scenarios, with the ultimate goal of ensuring that all of the strategies which the game intends to support are viable will never work because cash is still king.
Because of that even tho Bar may be made too powerful, unfair, or too easily obtained because real-world wealth can be used to obtain greater, more immediate rewards than skillful gameplay attempts of ensuring that all of the strategies which the game intends to support are viable will never work because cash is still king.

So rather than nerfing guns how about we revamp spar complex & basing because its already skewed hierarchy where richer players gain better items, allowing them to take on stronger opponents and level up more quickly than less wealthy but more committed players & nerfing guns isn't going to change that because real-world wealth can be used to obtain greater, more immediate rewards.

Create a base & spar room where game difficulty increases steadily along the course of the game.
That is bases & spar rooms restricted for certain Price range of guns this would avoid making the player bored (if the game is too easy) or frustrated (if it is too hard).
& it will lengthen & keep user interested from the beginning to the end, providing a good level of challenge longer!

[N!chola$]

Never trust Wikipedia
Other random people can edit it and say whatever they want. Try and get a source for the information that you are trying to show.

(I learned not to use Wikipedia from my teacher, okay)

[Donald]

I say never trust any source of information 100% even if its your teacher.
Even if you get the source how do you know it is true or false if you've never experienced it yourself.
Some forms of information like math & programming is facts but others like effects of manipulating the game & economics isn't as clear cut because largely opinion based & just represents one way of doing & does not mean it is the best way or only way.

[Key]

What about, finding the meaning in your book like chemistry?

[Graal Pro]

i love the nerfs, i want more nerfs

[Donald]

Bitz's I'd love to see the great changes you speak of but at the moment its hard for me to see it as anything other than you making things more M4 like. So why don''t you go ahead & explain how this is going to improve the game play long term & what do you mean by future proofing & it on what.
Everything I've said was from my observations & there are quite a few that agree with me. Honestly I don't have as much time on this game as much as I did before. We're all growing up & we're not all gonna have as much time to wait for the changes you must understand our decision too & some of our decision to not participate in pK activities anymore. Like Beo I too have stopped basing & sparring I'm still on often but its just its all feel a bit slow to me. I love my guns with their fast firerate at the moment my gun of choice is ak47.
A lot of these changes have left a lot of us scratching our heads, so if you could I''d like you to give us a bit of insight into what to expect moving forward.
Please don't say after this changes your going to be introducing new & better guns because a lot of us are so spent on this game. We gave & spent a lot on this game already & I though my gun collection was complete as in it was an all rounder until the new gun nerfs denting my efforts.
Do clarify how are you going to improve things in the future, you're a player too you can see most of the guns are still the same maybe sparring using m4 is slightly easier but is that really worth it. It would be unfair to say those who sparred using bar v bar were not using skill because that''d be ludicrous.
So Bitz please share with us your master plan & how long we have to wait before we can expect it if not then let us have our guns back please.
Also is there really no other way besides nerfing guns?
What about Mephs suggestion in the thread. How about we do this instead?


We do it like adding spawn huts to basing & separating the heavy weight class sparring weapons from the lower & midtier guns?

Also do clarify why guns like Candy Bazooka, Thompson, mp5a5 etc nerfed because their stats are clearly in the game & the descriptions so therefore shouldn't be nerfed. This is what you said

I'm assuming Bitzsams'' inability to respond to these questions is because he doesn't exactly know what he is doing. Hes made a lot of bold claims but like I've said none of the changes managed to change peoples behaviour.
A lot of people still has faith that Bitzsam knows what hes doing & still buys his narrative that this is for the good of the community despite the conflicting reality that begs to say otherwise.
Question is why do we continue to let him do this?
Things like nerfing guns to create a change in peoples approach to the game isn't a clear cut science because its a behavioural science people respond in different ways different people has different issues.
& I've pointed out that its quite likely the ''future proofing'' is likely going to be new guns.
The way hes gonna do it is by making more new guns the early move was necessary in order to make the upcoming guns thats hes going to make appear more attractive.
& if we let him get away with it history is likely to repeat itself but next time you''re going to be the victim.

Hes literally said he doesn't care if you bought the gun hes going to do whatever he wants to because other games do the same thing.
So my question to you guys who have played these other Massively multiplayer online role-playing games designers like COD, Dotta, Destiny etc is what has your experiences been following such nerfs to your favourite guns.
Its a common thing to say they're doing it for the community & use loaded words claiming an items is ''ÓP'' only to have them roll out another ''OP'' item shortly after then nerfs it after everyone gets it. Thats the narrative thats the issue it had nothing to do with the community & it never affected peoples behaviour the motive was to sell new guns & the people whos gonna have their pockets picked are those who already have the best guns. Fact is it never was about improving players in game experience the main goal has always been to prop up the new up & coming guns everything else is just a convenient excuse that plays on peoples emotions pitting us against each other.