you just telled about this experience of this LT, for than backing out with " i don’t want to be involed in this " ?
so you expect that in enlisted people getting shot multiple time and they shouldn’t/don’t die? is that what we want?
En-sponge-solders-listed?
i think that just like @5762269 and other says, perks should be removed, not all of them, but a good variety. honestly, it’s getting ridiculous.
how can those make sense? just think about, thicker bandages? we are just making a big laugh about it. but somehow this joke it’s a real thing in the game. does that have anything about realism? i don’t think so.
neither you, or moe still has a proper answer rather than covering the whole thing with: " i like it in this way " or " it’s right ", " Everything can be understandable one way or another " or even more, " people that thinks perks shouldn’t affect gameplay efficensy should leave ". because there’s a difference between realistic, and arcade. so i don’t understand why in a game like enlisted, made on skill base should apply to stupid perks. battle of perks 1941 colorized. it’s no fun at all.
right now, doesn’t feels that much of a realistic with people getting shot multiple times and shooting back withot flinch.
Im not backing out, i dont want another meaningless arguing with our dear friend Catz.
I dont want it in almost every player stack. The way it can be avoided - dont give so many five stars units and grants them one of best perks - more health or less recoil, for example.
And let em needs to be expirienced.
The main sence of what developers do is to hold players as longer as they can. With this great perks every player wants to upgrade their soldiers. Mostly for fun but it gives you a little advantage. I dont see it`a horrible buff while playing. Maybe incresing of damage to
upgraded top bolt rifles will help with this.
After i realise wipe will delete almost every progress i play less which means - the system works. I like to upgrade my units. Its a human psychology - a step by step building an uber squads.
And its not fast. You need a couple months of gameplay to have 5 of 5 stars units with perks. After this time of playing I deserve such a reword.
We have our opinions and its great i suppose. This is the way (c)
The realism is a friend. But a better friend is a player. And if this system will be keeping them for leaving - i want it a lot.
so realism one shot one kill from rifles makes people leave game and broken perks leading to survival of those shots make people stay in game according to you?
It kicks really hard side to side unless you’re standing still making it more difficult to control than the PPD or any of the MPs. With the horizontal reduction perk it makes it a lot more controllable only while standing which is fine imo.
Am I must answer? Realistic game - Arma 3. There is also one shot one kill. And miles of sneaking before bullet finds you. Its not the way for any free mmo-fps game to be honest.
Whats are we talking about here? Premium guns? Mr. incredible MP38 The Lasertag? Or flinch?
hey look, i ain’t here to make foes, or be a jerk, as i respect you as we had great moment on this forum, i recon you for the work that has been made around.
but yet you still didn’t answered. looks like you are avoiding on porpouse this whole big issue that is making people leave.
on this, we’re quite on the same page. the problem is, people grind for 5 stars as it’s ok.
minor buffs compared the others it’s still ok. but i don’t understand why so many brokens perks. and why people support them.
i just don’t understand that.
truee. and i’m sure that there are many others way to keep them.
yes, but not at the point where it’s not a skill base game anymore.
( at the point of breaking the meaning of realistic in the first place )
define the last part better.
i think that i’m reading this wrong.
yes, but not at the point where there’s not a reason behind. like, it’s not like explaining a simple color that gives you the idea of " yeah, i like this color because yes. " when talking about balance, we, as a tester, have to give our feedback but also be constructive AND be objective as possible.
the way you defend ( i mean, this should be brought more to @627636 than you to be honest ) it’s not leaving too much for a discussion in order to understand both points, and make a " better " idea combaining both points. in order to make a suggestion about it, and make this game better.
while i disagree with @5762269 to make make the first experience for new players easy as possible, he is not wrong at all. now days during moscow campaign you will end up facing mortars, premium squads, and many others troubles. those players might leave. and it’s not what the devs, want, and not what WE want.
it’s a simple math:
players = more matches, more matches = $$$, more $$$ = more content for everyone to play, and more content = everyone happy.
that’s why me and others are trying to " push " for make what everyone wants.
Its not that like. It have 40 vertical an 18 horizontal. You can control it. But Madsen have 30 and 30. Every second shot goes to the sky. But its ok. I know how to use it. Just lie down and then fire.
hll and ps very good games. But we dont need a third one. All these perks, upgrades etc make a game more sticky. It got to be sticky while its free. And i sure this is the right path. We need a lot of rebalancing, reworking on perks, on premium guys, on weapon upgrades. But the main idea is fine. i like it
We had enough conversations about balance, staying objective, not dreaming, talking about cons and pros and trying to find compromises. However each and every such talk ends with non-objective arguments (all of these):
dont want take upgrades into account
dont want take perks into account
think about newbies
not fair as a result
On top of this you throw such statements like “people are leaving the game”, “people wont like the game”. These are completely unprooven things, completely non-objective, its just guessing based on your own preferences.
Non of these arguments can be used to actually improve something.
There is literally barely anything left between ‘your side’ and ‘our side’ where we could agree. This comes because we like the game in its current state, we want it to improve (expand current mechanics: not remove, not rework, not overhaul, but polish and build over it), we also like perks and hope more of these coming soon.
Some people even believe the game in its current state is already more than ready for open beta and public release, while others still demand perks/upgrades/anything else to be removed or significantly changed in order to achieve some magic fairness.
Seriously, we like this game, we dont want it to become another regular shooter. If perks are that bad - they will be adjusted during the tests, however this SHOULD NOT change the base concept. You have to experience the difference between people based on the progression. I like this, i enjoy it and i’m pretty sure i would use this to adverts the game as a game feature that you wont find in every other shooter.
all i see, is people trying to prove their points above the others.
debatable. i think progress should be present in order to make people play the game the most.
i think this has to do not wanting those powerfull perks that almost make pointless all the others. and favor too much the player that is using them.
i don’t know about you, but for what i see, eating bullets shouldn’t be a thing in the first place. i just don’t understand how can you defend something similar.
not to mention, most of the time you mention that you kill people with one shot ( premium elements ) and other times, when people shows you that those elements don’t die like all the others do, you seems going blank like nothing happened. also, using already upgraded weapons.
i do understand that a veteran players experience should feel a bit easier. but you have to think for newer people watching the game for the first time.
unfortunally, this is truee.
it doesn’t take much to search for threads and speak with people.
it’s not about preferences?
just like the simple " math " that i showed, more people are gonna bring more income for the company, and later on, much more content for everyone.
so, i do care about newer people. i do understand that casual players shouldn’t be considered at the same level of veterans. ( as the words explain it self, casual ) but at the same time, they still are part of what we play for. nontheless, if they don’t like the game, that’s fine. but when almost many people complain about the same topics i’m more than sure it’s becouse there’s a problem with it that many people report.
and the other problem is, that there are also people that DON’T report.
so, i really don’t understand your logic. just becouse people don’t report or speak for it, this doesn’t meant that those people never existed.
preatty much debatable.
as you can see, most of the discussion brought on this forum brought results. such as, ba-11 removed, german nerf equipment, smg fixes, and many others improvements based on our feedbacks.
so it’s not always only black and white.
never seen you try though.
i see your point, but, and i’m sorry if there is a but. as i was trying to say, but if you do not touch the bad sides, people will always complain about those. and later on, notice new mechanics.
unfortunally, i never saw any post of people thinking that this game is ready. although, as i said before, this doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t be accounted.
the point is, this is far from ready. due to the " low " content. missing mechanics, and somewhat, buggy " feature " and a visible game breaking balance ( such as infinte mortars, and spawn protection even on rally points ).
i do agree with you.
that’s what most of the people hope for.
no doubts on that. that’s for sure.
that’s compleatly fine.
the point is, it shouldnt be hard to slightly decrease some of the stupid perks, and make others a bit effective in order to make perks more of a play style sided for your own choise.
and also give players something to grind on along side the researches.
i mean, as you can see. it’s not that hard having a conversation, and now that we are speaking about, i wanted to make one giant thread about perks and end this one and for once.
I would lean toward keeping flinch as there should be some negative effect to a soldier getting shot. It is impractical to model reactions to every kind of wound and I dont know of a better mechanic.
As it is it just makes SMGs more overpowered in that they can stunlock entire squads if you spray them like you usually do. It’s an anti-fun mechanic and removes other player’s ability to play and retaliate.
