Post by jaedrik on Nov 24, 2012 3:13:07 GMT -5
Alternate title: Gheist is bad.
I've had this on my mind since MW2.
What is opportunity cost? It is an economic consideration that if you do x, the means used doing x are not used, producing, or doing y, that opportunity is lost, this can easily extend to the broken window fallacy (completely different topic). For example, if I use the means provided to select a concussion grenade, I pay the price of not having any other tactical equipment, and so does everyone else.
You know what bros? You may hate me for this, but I think Last Stand is an economical and fair perk, because the opportunity cost is you can't have insane lunge range, you can't have steadier aim, you can't have quieter footsteps and anti heartbeat sensing, you can't delay or detect any equipment, I'd say that's a huge price to pay, though the advantage Last Stand provides may outweigh the advantages of the others, and therefore would be the most economical choice. That advantage is the chance, a very small one mind you, to return the favor on your sealed fate. I did not pick SitRep on my class that had Last Stand in MW2, and when I encountered a claymore or C4 it was goodnight. Last Stand wasn't the Stopping Power of perk 3 tier. The illustration is complete by saying the 'best' (in a praxeological sense, as in the best means to a specified end) perk in a category is the one that's opportunity cost sum is the lowest when considering situationals, map, environment, and most importantly synergetic effect.
Now this economic consideration is amplified many times over with BO2's pick ten system. We have to take more than ever into account certain synergies and overlapping roles and dependencies.
I don't think Ghost is as economical as it's overlapping alternatives and their corresponding synergies and benefits in BO2 in concern of winning a match, getting score streaks, getting points, and overall winning the game.
Here are the things in Ghost's favor: you are invulnerable to UAVs as long as you are on the move, and it can work faster than a launcher or Black Hat in disabling the UAV's effects on you. The most major one is that you do not have the necessity to risk yourself to disable the UAV's effects on you, as it works regardless of map and aerial view. Here's my least favorite one: the enemy will be distracted by killing your teammates.
Remember the way to determine this choice (in this calculation at least) is the cost of the most economical and synergetic sum.
This is the biggest knock for me: Only people who use Ghost are immune, that means your teammates who do not use Ghost are not immune, and you cannot assume or rely on them picking Ghost. Whether CoD is a more self-rewarding game or not, teammates are an indispensable thing when concerning your own success; they close off flanking routes, protect your spawn, help you clear objectives. In short, if your teammates do better you do better, and I don't want my teammates on the opponent's minimap, their functions as teammates would be greatly hindered, especially that flanking SMG guy, or that PTFO Flak Jacket guy, or more importantly that guy who's got your back, all of whom did not want to sacrifice their tokens and efficiency and means to their given role for another blue perk. Your teammates have to assume a role if they want to stay off the radar.
An easy one that most everything else carries is that it takes up the blue perk slot and a pick 10 token.
The synergetic effect of a launcher is far greater than that of Ghost, you can disable any killstreak, albeit at different dynamic in the risk vs reward department. If the SMAW is chosen (better for games when the enemy isn't as good, lending the team to crush any singular hope the other has as in one of their good guy got a UAV) you can also fire it at other scorestreaks, as well as being a nearly guaranteed One.Hit.Knock.Out. alternative. If the FHJ-18 AA is chosen as a higher capacity scorestreak killer at the cost of no free firing. Both of these choices have the disadvantage of taking up your secondary slot and spending a point, but I believe the choice of a different blue perk despite the other disadvantages of a launcher is far more valuable.
The synergetic effect of the Black Hat is. . . really, I mean, it's a lot, I mean, wow that thing is just awesome. . . until everyone wisens up and stops using stuff that can be hacked. BUT! For one consumable Black Hat you spend a point and effectively take away the tactical slot, and if you want to maximize it you get engineer, which in it's own right is quite useful. Black hat takes more time to take down scorestreaks even if you won't be on the enemy's radar after launching. Lastly, taking out scorestreaks gets you phat score.
In short the self-serving nature of Ghost is not worth the perceived benefits beyond a small niche due to the overwhelming benefits of it's competition, despite their own great disadvantages.
Share your economic calculations.
I've had this on my mind since MW2.
What is opportunity cost? It is an economic consideration that if you do x, the means used doing x are not used, producing, or doing y, that opportunity is lost, this can easily extend to the broken window fallacy (completely different topic). For example, if I use the means provided to select a concussion grenade, I pay the price of not having any other tactical equipment, and so does everyone else.
You know what bros? You may hate me for this, but I think Last Stand is an economical and fair perk, because the opportunity cost is you can't have insane lunge range, you can't have steadier aim, you can't have quieter footsteps and anti heartbeat sensing, you can't delay or detect any equipment, I'd say that's a huge price to pay, though the advantage Last Stand provides may outweigh the advantages of the others, and therefore would be the most economical choice. That advantage is the chance, a very small one mind you, to return the favor on your sealed fate. I did not pick SitRep on my class that had Last Stand in MW2, and when I encountered a claymore or C4 it was goodnight. Last Stand wasn't the Stopping Power of perk 3 tier. The illustration is complete by saying the 'best' (in a praxeological sense, as in the best means to a specified end) perk in a category is the one that's opportunity cost sum is the lowest when considering situationals, map, environment, and most importantly synergetic effect.
Now this economic consideration is amplified many times over with BO2's pick ten system. We have to take more than ever into account certain synergies and overlapping roles and dependencies.
I don't think Ghost is as economical as it's overlapping alternatives and their corresponding synergies and benefits in BO2 in concern of winning a match, getting score streaks, getting points, and overall winning the game.
Here are the things in Ghost's favor: you are invulnerable to UAVs as long as you are on the move, and it can work faster than a launcher or Black Hat in disabling the UAV's effects on you. The most major one is that you do not have the necessity to risk yourself to disable the UAV's effects on you, as it works regardless of map and aerial view. Here's my least favorite one: the enemy will be distracted by killing your teammates.
Remember the way to determine this choice (in this calculation at least) is the cost of the most economical and synergetic sum.
This is the biggest knock for me: Only people who use Ghost are immune, that means your teammates who do not use Ghost are not immune, and you cannot assume or rely on them picking Ghost. Whether CoD is a more self-rewarding game or not, teammates are an indispensable thing when concerning your own success; they close off flanking routes, protect your spawn, help you clear objectives. In short, if your teammates do better you do better, and I don't want my teammates on the opponent's minimap, their functions as teammates would be greatly hindered, especially that flanking SMG guy, or that PTFO Flak Jacket guy, or more importantly that guy who's got your back, all of whom did not want to sacrifice their tokens and efficiency and means to their given role for another blue perk. Your teammates have to assume a role if they want to stay off the radar.
An easy one that most everything else carries is that it takes up the blue perk slot and a pick 10 token.
The synergetic effect of a launcher is far greater than that of Ghost, you can disable any killstreak, albeit at different dynamic in the risk vs reward department. If the SMAW is chosen (better for games when the enemy isn't as good, lending the team to crush any singular hope the other has as in one of their good guy got a UAV) you can also fire it at other scorestreaks, as well as being a nearly guaranteed One.Hit.Knock.Out. alternative. If the FHJ-18 AA is chosen as a higher capacity scorestreak killer at the cost of no free firing. Both of these choices have the disadvantage of taking up your secondary slot and spending a point, but I believe the choice of a different blue perk despite the other disadvantages of a launcher is far more valuable.
The synergetic effect of the Black Hat is. . . really, I mean, it's a lot, I mean, wow that thing is just awesome. . . until everyone wisens up and stops using stuff that can be hacked. BUT! For one consumable Black Hat you spend a point and effectively take away the tactical slot, and if you want to maximize it you get engineer, which in it's own right is quite useful. Black hat takes more time to take down scorestreaks even if you won't be on the enemy's radar after launching. Lastly, taking out scorestreaks gets you phat score.
In short the self-serving nature of Ghost is not worth the perceived benefits beyond a small niche due to the overwhelming benefits of it's competition, despite their own great disadvantages.
Share your economic calculations.