Other > General Game Discussion

Something to think about

(1/6) > >>

avv:
Here's an attempt to explain why the playerbase seems to be divided in to pvp and no-pvp players. And a possible solution for it.

To pvp succesfully, you need a powerbuild. Basically only thing players ask about pvp is what is good a build, they don't ask what is a good strategy to beat the enemy. That's because the only strategy to beat someone is to get top tier stuff and shoot your enemy first. Then you look at the result and hopefully it favours you. I'm sure that gang vs gang pvp has all kinds of nice strategies varying from squad's formation to equipment, but still all those who participate in gang pvp are powerbuilds. In other words, characters do most of the work for players and pvp is only balanced for powerbuilds.

If you want to enjoy all sides of the game, you want to have some charisma, intelligence and luxury perks. But those luxuries do not pay off in pvp in any way, except with charisma you get a merc. But still, pretty face doesn't deal more damage, that's why I always finish cute slaves with sledgehammer headshot to remind them of that. Pvp players might say that they pay "the price" for losing luxuries for improved pvp abilities, however they don't necessarily even want to participate in anything else than pvp so where's the loss?

Because SPECIAL is for single player game, all the skills and perks are geared towards fights against npcs. Npcs have supernatural abilities that have to be countered with pure mathematics and percentages. Similar system doesn't work well in multiplayer game where you fight against other players. For example if this was a fps game, a fonline sniper class would have headshotting autoaim as default feature. In a real fps game, the sniper class is only given a sniper rifle and rest is up to the player's skills.
 
What should be done to reduce the gap between pvp and non-pvp char effectiveness is to alter the way stat, perks and skills affect the character's firepower and hitpoints. Vision and action points are also important factors.
They should only determine what you can do, not how well you can do it.
If perks, stats and skills would only provide additional options instead of direct buffs to combat effectiveness, anyone could pick up a gun and go fight for whatever he felt worth fighting for. However a differend fighting builds would just have more tricks in their disposal, rather than simply being able to deal more damage and withstand more blows as default. Those tricks just wouldn't help if someone happens to outsmart the fighter and shoot him in the spine with shotgun.

ShemsuHor:
It seems..intreresting, but the whole idea would completely change the game mechanincs... I quess. 

--- Quote ---They should only determine what  you can do, not how well you can do it.
If perks, stats and skills would only provide additional options instead of direct buffs to combat effectiveness, anyone could pick up a gun and go fight for whatever he felt worth fighting for.
--- End quote ---
I'm sorry- could you explain that part?

avv:

--- Quote from: ShemsuHor on April 14, 2010, 06:57:27 pm ---I'm sorry- could you explain that part?
--- End quote ---

Yes. Instead of pure damage/crit chance/accuracy buffs perks provide an additional abilities which you can use. For example only characters with certain perk could perform eyeshots or disarming shots, because that kind of attacks demand higher than averge skill. Some other perk would allow you to reload your gun while you're running. Maybe some perk could give you additional weapon slot. Perks could give you additional attack methods like "triple strike" for punches and some small guns, "short burst" for big machine guns.

Perks like bonus rate of fire, bonus ranged damage, living anatomy should be either removed or their effect changed. They are too necessary for succesful pvp and force certain characters to take them or do significantly less damage. Same goes for more criticals and better criticals. That kind of perks are in this game because of fonline's singleplayer origin. Character had to become a one man army in order to kill enclave patrols or fight end boss.

Badger:
It's worth considering, but a lot of the stuff you talk about would require overhauling the Fallout mechanics to suit a multiplayer game. It'd be a Fallout MMO rather than the Fallout 2 mechanics with a lot of players. And that stuff would require engine tinkering.

I think such a change would be good, and make the game a lot more entertaining and appeal to a wider playerbase, but there's a lot of people who play this game because of how faithful it is to the originals.

I think the game is held back by its strict adherence to the original Fallout mechanics, but for some that its charm. Differing tastes, basically.

Roachor:
So your suggestion is to take out all the good combat perks? That's retarded there aren't that many perks to begin with and the non combat perks are terrible.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page