|
|
Post by mrcongo93 on Sept 18, 2015 19:26:21 GMT -5
So I've lurked this board for a few years, but hardly ever post. I usually just come to learn and study up on the mechanics. Over the past few years, I've seen COD weapons just get more and more ridiculous as they try to balance them out with new mechanics or try to make them accessible. It's why I think the entire weapon and attachment system needs to be overhauled.
I've thought this since Black Ops 1. And I don't mean a minute difference like MW3 and Black Ops II, I mean drastically changing weapon TTKs and kill abilities, either through damage, rate of fire, or both in some cases. It'll help to differentiate each class from one another, and allow weapons to fall into their niche roles better. For example:
-Auto Weapons have a minimum 4HK for slower firing weapons (Ex: SCAR-H, AK-47), and 5HK minimum for faster firing weapons (Ex: Mini-Uzi, P90). Exceptions would be super low range weapons (Ex: Skorpion) or super slow firing, high power weapons (Ex: M60), which would still have 3HK capabilities. This allows better for players to fight back and engage in more gunfights.
-Marksman Rifles retain their usual 2-3HK across ranges, but to balance out their TTK against auto weapons, their firecaps will be reduced to 300 RPM and less. In addition, their mobility and handling will be slightly worse than Assault Rifles (Slightly worse hipfire, and .300 ADS Time instead of .250). This prevents spamming, and forces players to pick their shots, like they should with "Marksman" Rifles.
-Burst Rifles/SMG's will retain their higher power per bullet and higher RPM within their bursts (Ex: Swat-556 40-33 with 925-950 RPM per burst, or M8A1 30-20 and 1200 RPM per burst), but they will be given slightly worse hipfire accuracy and ADS time than regular AR's, similar to the DMR's
-Sniper Rifles will maintain their high power, but will have their mobility decreased further, ADS Time and Sprint Out Time (I'm talking .5 Seconds Sprint Out and ADS Time), as well as the Semi-Auto's having the same Fire Rate nerf as the DMR's. This way, they are still the unquestionable destructive forces at a long range, but are very difficult to use at a close range.
-Shotguns need a massive overhaul. They should be highly dependent on skill to use, the only skill shouldn't have to be getting into barrel stuffing range. Instead of having high damage and high spreads like the past few titles (BOII, Ghosts, AW), they need to have a bit of harmony across their damage and range profiles. Take a page from BF4, where they have high pellet counts with lower damage per pellet, and more compact spreads. I'm talking instead of a pump action doing 50-20 (400-160) with a 8 Degree Spread, have it do 12-5 Damage per pellet with 20 Pellets (240-100) and a Hipspread of 4 Degrees.
This way, the overall damage output per shot is lower, but with more pellets per shot and a more compact spread, it makes the shots more consistent across the weapons range, and definitely makes it more dependent to get a clear and accurate shot to do more damage. They should also have their effective ranges increased as well. A Pump Action shotgun should be able to get a OSK out to at least 650-700 Inches, but be able to hit out to around 800-900 inches. With these new mechanics, longer kills will be possible, but it's highly dependent on player skill to get such kills with the lower damage and more compact spreads.
-Handguns go back to similar damage profiles like Black Ops I and MW3 (3-5 Hit Kills), but have the longer range profiles of Black Ops II (Effective Ranges of around 15-25 Meters, or 700-1200 Inches). To compensate, they suffer a fire rate cap decrease similar to the DMR's and Snipers, to the point where the lower power Handguns can't fire faster than 350-400 RPM, or the High Power Magnums at a max 200-250 RPM.
-Nerf Mobility Attachments: It's really no secret to anyone that if you're using an Assault Rifle or LMG, you're running either the Stock or Quickdraw Handle, possibly both. What this does is remove their two biggest weakness to SMG's in close range, being the worse handling and mobility, and makes them able to compete at pretty much every range really easily, something that shouldn't be happening. I'm not saying remove the attachments, but reduce their effectiveness. For quickdraw, only do a 20% reduction in ADS time (.250 to .200 for AR's, .350 to .280 for LMG's, etc.), and reduce the speed increase when using stock. This way, they still present a marked improvement over the base statistics, but they become less like crutches, and give the player a boost in other situations, while still encouraging them to remain in their weapons comfort zone.
I really want honest opinions and constructive discussions about this. Do you think increasing the TTK would help out COD in terms of the gameplay? Is there other stuff that needs to be done, either in tandem or on its own? I
|
|
pachiderm
True Bro
Chewing some serious leaves
Posts: 647
|
Post by pachiderm on Sept 18, 2015 20:56:30 GMT -5
What you're describing is essentially a different game. These tweaks, while fairly minor compared to some suggestions I've seen on here, will dramatically change the way the game plays. I know tons of people incessantly make the suggestion that Call of Duty needs to change and that it's just a copy-paste of the previous game released every year, and I know balance threads are extremely popular with people who think they know how to "fix" CoD's mechanics, but there comes a point where you've made so many changes that the game stops being what it is and starts being something else. Now there's nothing wrong with being something else, aside from the fact that some people will love the changes and some people will hate them because they preferred the game the way it was. I, however, am of the opinion that a franchise should be a known quantity. That you should know exactly what you're getting when you buy an iteration of that franchise. I wasn't happy with Advanced Warfare or Halo 4 for this reason and I probably wouldn't be happy with Halo 5 (if I planned on buying it) or any other game that claims to be something it's not so that it can hang onto a loyal cadre of fans while attempting to appeal to people who didn't like the game before. There's nothing wrong with games that aren't Call of Duty, but they shouldn't have Call of Duty stamped on their box.
With that said, there's also nothing wrong with liking games that aren't Call of Duty, and there's nothing wrong with not buying Call of Duty games because you don't like how they play. However, it doesn't make sense to continue buying a game you don't like and expecting a franchise to change simply because you don't like it anymore, or never really liked it in the first place. As you play more games your taste in games will evolve and you will find that you like some games you didn't like before and don't like other games that you used to love. Now, I agree with you on some of these points (mobility attachments especially), and I'm really only picking on you because we get a lot of these threads here and most of them seem like they're made by people who don't really like Call of Duty but play it anyway for some reason. But again, these tweaks would dramatically change the way the game plays. Shotguns would less reliably one shot people especially in spamming range, assault rifles would not be the dominant force they were, SMGs would absolutely become king especially with the map design being the way it is. Also, there are so many other factors not taken into account here that I really can't say for certain how this game would play if they made the changes you suggest, and what is the point of suggesting changes if you don't know for sure what kind of effect they're going to have?
|
|
asasa
True Bro
fuck
Posts: 4,255 
|
Post by asasa on Sept 19, 2015 8:58:41 GMT -5
I was ok with it until 300rpm marksman rifles lellelelelelelelelle that's a good one
|
|
|
|
Post by mrcongo93 on Sept 19, 2015 9:00:40 GMT -5
I don't see how they're too drastic of changes. It's pretty often that developers go through and completely change weapon balance and design, and still maintain the original feel of the game. Moving from MW2 to Black Ops, the removal of stopping power (Which I will defend to my grave as a great decision in spite of what others say) changed the TTK massively across the metagame, I'm simply suggesting to tweak it a little more, as well as switching weapon mobility and handling to correspond to it. I would hope this wouldn't divide too many players, but then again, look what happened with Exo's in AW. Some players hated them, and others loved them.
I still like COD, it's in my top 5 favorite shooters, even the recent games. I'm saying that an underlying problem in each game seems to be weapon balance, and in order to maintain that crazy feel that COD has, they went a little overboard with some weapons and attachments. Weapons are used at ranges where they shouldn't be viable, and that's due to how they're balanced. I personally think that Black Ops 1 and 2 were the 2 best balanced COD games, despite some of the craziness pre-patch.
This may not be as easy to explain without some visual examples. For the past few months, I've been examining all the spreadsheets from across each game, and making a weapon and attachment list for an, IMO, ideal COD game. I'm still fine tuning some things, but with this boards approval, I'd like to show it off once I'm done and gain some valuable criticism or have any flaws pointed out.
|
|
|
|
Post by jaedrik on Sept 19, 2015 11:40:03 GMT -5
TTK equivalence does not balance make. Higher RoF weapons have an inherent qualitative advantage all else being equal.
And what Pach said.
And Mousey.
Longer TTK does not necessarily more skill inject to a game.
|
|
banana
True Banana
Zoro > Law
Posts: 1,577
|
Post by banana on Sept 19, 2015 12:11:46 GMT -5
As long as there's no 3hk 900rpm or a long range 3hk 720rpm assualt rifle/smg we're good on ttk. Ghosts violated both iirc and AW violated both as well with the speakeasy and obsidian steed. Anyway, in terms of gun balance the only thing the recent cods realistically need is better shotguns (primarily done by lowering hipspread) and snipers with aim assist + .3 ads speed
|
|
|
|
Post by mrcongo93 on Sept 19, 2015 13:05:37 GMT -5
I always thought the advantage of higher RPM weapons lies in their more consistent TTK, being that the higher volume of lead makes missing a shot or two less important. Where as the higher power and lower RPM weapons had the potential for a faster TTK, but had lower margins for error if a player misses a shot. At least that's how I always saw it.
|
|
banana
True Banana
Zoro > Law
Posts: 1,577
|
Post by banana on Sept 20, 2015 12:13:10 GMT -5
I always thought the advantage of higher RPM weapons lies in their more consistent TTK, being that the higher volume of lead makes missing a shot or two less important. Where as the higher power and lower RPM weapons had the potential for a faster TTK, but had lower margins for error if a player misses a shot. At least that's how I always saw it. I'd still rather take a 3hk 600 rpm weapon vs a 4hk 720 rpm weapon. aka base hbr > base bal/ak12 |
|
|
|
Post by Pope Leo VII on Sept 22, 2015 10:18:40 GMT -5
-Shotguns need a massive overhaul. They should be highly dependent on skill to use, the only skill shouldn't have to be getting into barrel stuffing range. Instead of having high damage and high spreads like the past few titles (BOII, Ghosts, AW), they need to have a bit of harmony across their damage and range profiles. Take a page from BF4, where they have high pellet counts with lower damage per pellet, and more compact spreads. I'm talking instead of a pump action doing 50-20 (400-160) with a 8 Degree Spread, have it do 12-5 Damage per pellet with 20 Pellets (240-100) and a Hipspread of 4 Degrees. This way, the overall damage output per shot is lower, but with more pellets per shot and a more compact spread, it makes the shots more consistent across the weapons range, and definitely makes it more dependent to get a clear and accurate shot to do more damage. They should also have their effective ranges increased as well. A Pump Action shotgun should be able to get a OSK out to at least 650-700 Inches, but be able to hit out to around 800-900 inches. With these new mechanics, longer kills will be possible, but it's highly dependent on player skill to get such kills with the lower damage and more compact spreads. In order to keep up with the high rate of fire weapons the TTK for shotguns needs to be instantaneous while in close proximity. Shotguns are meant to be kings of the close quarter engagements. Once we start treading outside this range, their effectiveness and usefulness drops off fast and hard.. as they should.
How to go about this is an entire different story. Increase the damage of the weapon... Increase the pellet spread. A change needs to occur As of now, SMG and AR destroy up close due to high rate of fire. They can pump you full of bullets, while you struggle to get off one shot...let alone a second Common sense kicks in and tells ya that ADSing tightens up the hip spread and makes the gun accurate as fuck. In theory this is the way things should play out.. in actuality it makes the gun less accurate. Hip firing is the only way to consistently earn 1 shot kills. Completely stopped ADSing by the end of the BO3 beta.. On average would take about 3 shots up close to down an opponent. |
|
banana
True Banana
Zoro > Law
Posts: 1,577
|
Post by banana on Sept 22, 2015 11:54:18 GMT -5
any shotgun buff we can get is good
|
|
|
|
Post by kylet357 on Sept 23, 2015 1:01:48 GMT -5
Tighter hipspreads, longer ranges, and damage figures that don't dip below 15 or 10 for minimum damage.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pope Leo VII on Sept 23, 2015 9:15:09 GMT -5
definitely dont increase pellet spread. there are ways to enforce the whole cqc thing without ripping aim entirely out of the equation. nobody liked the r870. EDIT: Also the notion of ADS making things less accurate sounds completely moronic to even consider as a possibilityCompletely agree my man.. Forced me into pulling out what little hair I have, trying to make sense of this ridiculous notion. Unfortunately my entire experience on the BO3 Beta and AW back this up. Hip Firing within the close and medium ranges was the only method of ensuring 1hk. ADS only yielded hit-markers upon hit-markers.. Honestly...What was wrong with the Remington It was completely on par with the other strong weapons in the game. You cant expect to venture into close quarters and win battles with a weapon built for these encounters. |
|
banana
True Banana
Zoro > Law
Posts: 1,577
|
Post by banana on Sept 23, 2015 9:52:59 GMT -5
isn't the ads spread like a 1 or 2 in bo3? it's mor accurate, not less
|
|
|
|
Post by Marvel4 on Sept 23, 2015 10:03:56 GMT -5
Exactly.
|
|
asasa
True Bro
fuck
Posts: 4,255
|
Post by asasa on Sept 23, 2015 10:59:57 GMT -5
That's why I also cry for longer ttk. Shotguns can stay almost the same, snipers get tiny handing nerf, full autos get a well deserved ass fucking, and the classes are now balanced. I can't see the harm in the "normal ar" having much higher recoil or one more bullet to kill (excl. Lmgs)
Seems to open the game up for more variety and more skill in the gunfights.
|
|
asasa
True Bro
fuck
Posts: 4,255
|
Post by asasa on Sept 23, 2015 16:20:49 GMT -5
That's true, but are the classes really rock paper scissors atm?
I don't think it's quite that powerful, hence shotguns not being competitive for anyone but the worst of players. I'd imagine that in a CoD where the full autos took about 1 more shot to kill or had the recoil of the RPK, shotguns would not inherently obliterate everything up close as equally powerful full autos still exist, but require more skill.
It's hard to say for sure. My thoughts would be most increases in "rock paper scissor gameplay" could be corrected with the increased balancing opportunities and skill gap.
By the way, is it practical for shotguns to act like this:
Spread is a cone
Damage is a number
Damage dealt is the percent of the cones area projected onto a hitbox
Essentially having #pellets approach infinity.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2015 3:00:47 GMT -5
Wow. That 13-year contract between Tony Hawk and Activision is really taking its toll.
|
|
fpsdredd
True Bro
Always working on the FPS metagame
Posts: 495
|
Post by fpsdredd on Sept 24, 2015 10:06:33 GMT -5
By the way, is it practical for shotguns to act like this: Spread is a cone Damage is a number Damage dealt is the percent of the cones area projected onto a hitbox Essentially having #pellets approach infinity. Could work |
|
|
|
Post by Pope Leo VII on Sept 24, 2015 10:10:15 GMT -5
By the way, is it practical for shotguns to act like this: Spread is a cone Damage is a number Damage dealt is the percent of the cones area projected onto a hitbox Essentially having #pellets approach infinity. Could work Makes way to much sense to ever be implemented.. Wonder whether any of the Devs actually use shotguns.. |
|
asasa
True Bro
fuck
Posts: 4,255
|
Post by asasa on Sept 24, 2015 12:16:10 GMT -5
I'm sure it's not too complex of calculus but I'm not yet sure how that works.
What I'm finding most confusing is how the hipfire currently works. I thought it acted as a cylinder... But it can't be. But I don't think it's really a cone either.. So does it somehow project your crosshairs over to anything ahead and then randomly select a point inside of this circle as your bullet.. Which I guess makes it a cone except the bullets don't "travel" at an angle?
|
|
banana
True Banana
Zoro > Law
Posts: 1,577
|
Post by banana on Sept 24, 2015 15:33:18 GMT -5
what do y'all think the lowest the minimum damage should be on shotguns?
|
|
|
|
Post by kylet357 on Sept 24, 2015 16:22:55 GMT -5
15.
|
|
asasa
True Bro
fuck
Posts: 4,255
|
Post by asasa on Sept 24, 2015 17:34:12 GMT -5
Percentage of a cone projected onto the hitbox would not have the same affect of pellets aproaching infinity because the hitbox wont be flat towards the shooter. Youd be better off just calculating distance from the shooter and then a perpendicular distance to the center of their aim at the time of shooting. Still it doesnt matter. The way shotguns work mechanicly isnt an inherant flaw. they suck because cod is aimed towards a casual audience. As it stands, shotties are designed in a way which makes them really good against bad players and really bad against good ones. The root of the problem is thay with the extremely varying damage and generally high spread, the weapon class doesnt really reward good aim or punish bad aim. The whole laser cone thingy makes the guns more consistent but thats easy to solve. Theres a million ways to do that, but the devs wont do it because people hate instakills so they dont actually want strong shotguns. Hitscans inherently work fine against surfaces that arent perpendicular.. right? So the cone part is the problem? It seems like it would be kinda ugly but possible to get the same result. Anyway the reason I mentioned it is because it would make shotguns completely consistent. It's not necessarily a "flaw" that they arent consistent, but I think we'd agree it would be better if they were. If AR's did random damage from 35-49 for the max damage range I don't think that's a flaw, but it's not a good thing either. Obviously right now a shotgun might kill someone with only 20% of your crosshairs covering them, while it's also possible to have 80% coverage and not kill them with the same weapon and conditions. If the damage was percentage of crosshairs covering them, there would be no randomness. The "SPAS-12" could be made so that it needs 40% coverage or more for a 1HK up close, and a "AA-12" could be set to require 80% coverage. Seems like a beneficial change to me. There are easier ways to get nearly the same level of consistency too, i'm sure, like having the pellets come out in pre-determined "locations" rather than randomly. Why do you say that this would make people hate shotguns even more? I personally hate shotguns for two reasons: 1. They are random 2. They can instakill If they were not random, then at least if I got instakilled it was because of the player's aim. Same as sniper hipfire - I dont think anything is worse than that. Extremely random, potential instakill. |
|
|
|
Post by Megaqwerty on Sept 24, 2015 18:45:01 GMT -5
what do y'all think the lowest the minimum damage should be on shotguns? 200. For increased penetration. |
|
wings
True Bro
Posts: 3,776
|
Post by wings on Sept 25, 2015 9:29:06 GMT -5
-Sniper Rifles will maintain their high power, but will have their mobility decreased further, ADS Time and Sprint Out Time (I'm talking .5 Seconds Sprint Out and ADS Time), as well as the Semi-Auto's having the same Fire Rate nerf as the DMR's. This way, they are still the unquestionable destructive forces at a long range, but are very difficult to use at a close range. And what is long range for a COD game given the maps have been catering for CQC more and more over the years? Normally I wouldn't mind proposing longer ranged weapons to be more ineffective in close range combat, but I find submachine guns and assault rifles encroach on distances beyond their ideal range more than marksman rifles and sniper rifles do for shorter ranged engagements. At least this was my experience in Black Ops 2 anyway. Could you imagine assault rifles in COD having damage drop off and recoil like the Lancer does in Gears of War 3? Nope. But then that is done deliberately because there is no opportunity cost in equipping a CQC gun, whether it's a pistol or a shotgun. May be some changes to the mechanics can only be made if Overkill was gotten rid of so you can equip two weapons of your own choosing with no drawbacks or something. It's not like I can't scavenge to pick up a second 'primary' weapon anyway. |
|
asasa
True Bro
fuck
Posts: 4,255
|
Post by asasa on Sept 25, 2015 11:57:15 GMT -5
Cough cough full autos need more recoil or lower damage  I really dislike MW2 style snipers. Slow, powerful, and not conducive to hardscoping (I.e. Must lower scope to cock bolt before firing again) is my preference. |
|
|
|
Post by kylet357 on Sept 25, 2015 12:34:55 GMT -5
I wonder if they should make sniper rifles like BC2 bolt-action sniper, in that the cocking animation has to be completed before you scope back in.
|
|
banana
True Banana
Zoro > Law
Posts: 1,577
|
Post by banana on Sept 25, 2015 12:43:47 GMT -5
.3 sniper ads is perf
|
|
|
|
Post by ChloeB42 (Alexcalibur42) on Sept 25, 2015 15:02:54 GMT -5
Cough cough full autos need more recoil or lower damage I really dislike MW2 style snipers. Slow, powerful, and not conducive to hardscoping (I.e. Must lower scope to cock bolt before firing again) is my preference. That makes hardscoping harder though and minimally affects quickscoping. It also nerfs bolt-action vs semiautomatic snipers. Terrible idea is terrible |
|
asasa
True Bro
fuck
Posts: 4,255
|
Post by asasa on Sept 25, 2015 18:12:24 GMT -5
I wonder if they should make sniper rifles like BC2 bolt-action sniper, in that the cocking animation has to be completed before you scope back in. I think that would be bad. Right now if you time things right you can fire off as if you never had to put your sights down. If it acted like that, people would be running around like retards and the effective ADS time would be a lot higher for all shots except the first. Too fast IMO. I guess it wouldn't really effect you if you were sprinting once below ~.4s ADS due to the sprint delay if that means anything. I just like ~.4s ADS because it allows them to be powerful without being overpowered. People would complain to hell if snipers could ADS-instantly even though that has almost no effect on the skill requirements for quickscoping with them. But I guess it also makes "hardscoping" easier because you essentially have an extra 100ms to line up your shot that you otherwise would not have. Cough cough full autos need more recoil or lower damage I really dislike MW2 style snipers. Slow, powerful, and not conducive to hardscoping (I.e. Must lower scope to cock bolt before firing again) is my preference. That makes hardscoping harder though and minimally affects quickscoping. It also nerfs bolt-action vs semiautomatic snipers. Terrible idea is terrible Thats kinda what I want. Adjusting ADS time effects a shit ton of things but overall longer ADS makes quickscoping worse and hardscoping better. If it took a whole second to ADS no one would be quickscoping. It would suck. Hardscoping would be possible though. Then the having to cock the bolt is just there to hurt hardscoping, which is good with me. It really only hurts if you are unable to line up shots quickly, so it increases the skill gap, which means that the gun can be made more powerful and have more utility for good players, while being less useful for new players. And the powerful is just the reward for hitting your shots but not requiring people to track certain parts of the body, which is not really possible in CoD. |
|
