PDA

View Full Version : WEAPONS Why Hunter's Spread Needs To Be Removed.



ThatsNotMyPirate
24th Mar 2014, 15:08
This problem can be compared with the removal of Dodge Runes/Stat from League of Legends.

Riot removed the Dodge stat because it relied on chance. This isn't skill, and it isn't fun. In any game, it's not fun to see your foe get away with 1 HP because your last shot didn't land even if you were aiming well.

What they did, is they replaced the stat with armor to help lower damage.

Hunters DPS right now is currently the highest, and even with Spread they still can deal out super high dps from afar. Both of these are problems. So by removing Spread we can add diminishing damage from afar. Hunters should be mid ranged heroes. Their highest DPS should be mid to close range. So they should be able to hit from afar but with lower damage the farther the distance, or have the recoil high enough to where its hard to aim at long distances.

This fixes the chance problem. It rewards good aim(skill) and doesn't leave it up to chance for that last tick of damage you need to get that kill.

If your foe gets away, it should be a fault by the player, not the system.

HoneyMuffins
24th Mar 2014, 15:18
Loving this idea, I played game where shots would give less damage the further away the target was. With this idea you could also change different weapons stats as well, so the Siege bow could do more damage at long range but less at close range whereas the bolt thrower would be the opposite, I think this idea will open up a lot of new gameplay and new equipment.

ThatsNotMyPirate
24th Mar 2014, 15:26
I also like that idea Honey. Also I believe at long range they should do 50% damage and at close range do 80% damage. So mid range will be the Hunter Sweet spot. Where he can hit for 100% or maybe even 110%. Also vampires should light up when hunters shoot them so they are in this Hunter Sweet Spot. For Vampires, they should get a different hit animation and hit audio so they know they are in this zone.

killdrith
24th Mar 2014, 15:28
Damage is currently diminishing over range for weapons.

I'm all for taking away RNG. The one thing that RNG does here is create a class that is more forgiving to new players. You're displaying the negatives of RNG (skilled players being punished). This game already is punishing to new players. In my opinion they seriously need to make the game more intuitive in some aspects as I believe it's very important for this genre in order to be successful upon launch.
So perfectly accurate weapons are ideal the better you get at the game and a frustration for vets. But because of the RNG they're able to up the damage a bit and tote it towards new players.
Really I'm just playing devil's advocate here and trying to explain the possible thought process behind the devs. Just my guess..

Oroibahazopi
24th Mar 2014, 16:00
They thought projectiles were too hard. So only solution is to use crappy hitscan like every other shooter.

Boreaquis
24th Mar 2014, 16:11
Damage falloff (reduced damage based on distance) is definitely needed for the crossbows, I agree. Spread isn't entirely random, because you minimize it by firing in controlled bursts. It could be removed, but then we'd need a stronger recoil system to prevent full-auto craziness.

As killdrith mentions, this means that the crossbows would have to be made weaker for new players (or they'd be too strong in hands of skilled players). I don't think this is all bad though, as hunter is currently the easiest human class to play, and seems to be the go-to choice for newer players, so a change like this might result in more varied human lineups in newbie matches.

ThatsNotMyPirate
24th Mar 2014, 19:05
Glad you all mostly agree. There maybe damage fall off, but I think it needs to be strong.

Also I understand we want to be welcoming to new players. I get that I really do. But I think if they made a good training or maybe play vs A.I. They will get the hang of it.

LoL is a great model to look at. It is a hard game and unforgiving for new players. But they added A.I and great tutorial to over come this.

Be welcoming to new players with giving them the tools to understand that game. BUT not at the cost of the balance of the game.

Psyonix_Eric
24th Mar 2014, 20:29
They thought projectiles were too hard. So only solution is to use crappy hitscan like every other shooter.
What a polite way of putting it. :rolleyes:

Psyonix_Corey
24th Mar 2014, 20:57
Damage falloff is already in place. We tried increasing it during Alpha and saw serious balance implications to human effectiveness. We could revisit this, however.

Spread exists not to have RNG for RNG's sake (you will notice there's generally no random abilities or functionality elsewhere) but to reduce accuracy at long ranges. It's not true "RNG" because you have to be aiming accurately for it to even become a factor (whereas "Dodge" in LoL is a pure dice roll), but I understand the frustration with it not being reliable or consistent like everything else is.

We have resisted moving to a spread-less, high-falloff system because in general we don't like the idea of pinpoint accurate crossbows from anywhere in the map, no matter how reduced the damage.

One option would be to introduce true projectile weapons with less or no spread - this punishes long range accuracy based on the speed of the projectile (crossbow bolts would be slower/less accurate than Longbow arrows, for instance) and rewards skill, but is dramatically harder to use for low-mid skill players. This would require a significant adjustment to overall balance and isn't a simple rework, though, so it has not progressed beyond early consideration.

Khalith
24th Mar 2014, 21:30
We have resisted moving to a spread-less, high-falloff system because in general we don't like the idea of pinpoint accurate crossbows from anywhere in the map, no matter how reduced the damage.

I understand your point here, but the issue is even with spread people are getting pinpoint accurate crossbow shots from anywhere on the map already with not enough fall off in damage. As (most) players play they're going to get better at aiming and learn to account for the spread and continue pushing their accuracy higher, only the hunter really needs the high damage falloff at long ranges in place.

Even with the damage nerf, Hunter would still remain incredibly effective, Bola is still the most powerful CC in the game and their high burst for a finisher (blinding, explosive, grenade) allows them to perform really well. If you don't want to add higher fall off or spread then it might just be time to lower the hunter damage per bolt, bring their damage from 60-70 to something more reasonable like 30-40.

cmstache
24th Mar 2014, 23:55
Only people who mainly played hunters in alpha actually complained. There were those of us that liked it. The other issue is that it hit the scout as hard as the hunter, which was less accepted. If you just make the hunter only affected it would be more acceptable.



This is something I've thought about recently though that might help without actually changing the damage variables:

The repeater and siege bow are both highly hated for their DPS, the repeater more so since it has less recoil (so apply this to the repeater more than the siege bow.) Give the recoil a slight left and right motion (as if the hunter is trying to steady the crossbow) along with the upward jerk, and increase it over time. Hunters have more range and DPS than the alch, which shouldn't be so (with all that range). This would alleviate that at a distance, but allow solid close range DPS.


Another thing that might help this is to give the Z-plane damage falloff back (at least somewhat) to the hunter, but leave it off for the scout.

ThatsNotMyPirate
25th Mar 2014, 00:08
We have resisted moving to a spread-less, high-falloff system because in general we don't like the idea of pinpoint accurate crossbows from anywhere in the map, no matter how reduced the damage.

Just because you don't like the idea is a bad reason haha. A Crossbow is more accurate then a Bow and Arrow, but players aren't complaining.

But I can see how pin point accuracy bugs you, so why don't have it so they just can't hit at long range. At a max range the bolts stop. The fact is players can accept stuff like a bow being 100% accurate and a Crossbow that shoot like a machines gun and reloads in 2 seconds. As long as skill is the factor in why they are good, over chance of any kind.

Psyonix_Eric
25th Mar 2014, 00:37
Just because you don't like the idea is a bad reason.
Actually, that's a pretty good reason. We are making the game, after-all. :p We're always open to ideas but it doesn't always mean that we will implement everything that is suggested, especially if we feel like the change would be a detriment to the game. Some things we've tried before and they ended up as really bad once implemented, and if that's the case we're quite hesitant to push something out that's going to make the game bad.

ThatsNotMyPirate
25th Mar 2014, 00:58
If that's the case we're quite hesitant to push something out that's going to make the game bad.

Like Poison Bola? A widely agreed upon broken skill and then the added removal of dodge to it? It is true that you are the ones making the game and you pick and choose what goes in. But at the end of the day, it is we(the players) who decide if you are successful or not.

Remember we are here helping you guys. Giving you our time. The most valuable thing anyone has, for free

Psyonix_Corey
25th Mar 2014, 01:02
Give the recoil a slight left and right motion (as if the hunter is trying to steady the crossbow) along with the upward jerk, and increase it over time. Hunters have more range and DPS than the alch, which shouldn't be so (with all that range). This would alleviate that at a distance, but allow solid close range DPS.

We already have some subtle horizontal recoil, but increasing it on the Hunter crossbow is a good idea.

cmstache
25th Mar 2014, 01:04
We already have some subtle horizontal recoil, but increasing it on the Hunter crossbow is a good idea.


Booya!

ThatsNotMyPirate
25th Mar 2014, 01:05
We already have some subtle horizontal recoil, but increasing it on the Hunter crossbow is a good idea.

That's awesome news! ha.

Monowar
25th Mar 2014, 01:06
Regarding the Hunter class, one question that's always bugged me - in a situation where the ranged advantage of Hunters is nullified are they supposed to be able to take out a Tyrant in a one on one fight?

cmstache
25th Mar 2014, 02:25
Regarding the Hunter class, one question that's always bugged me - in a situation where the ranged advantage of Hunters is nullified are they supposed to be able to take out a Tyrant in a one on one fight?

No, because they still have more range than that Tyrant. And, they already do, without the use of skills.

Omhxyz
25th Mar 2014, 09:57
Im against recoil increase, it comes with 2 issues; players can adjust to it and shoot like nothing changed after a while AND this is reducing hunters effectiveness in close/mid range combat.

It took me 2 games to adjust to the latest recoil changes, then i was shooting sentinels again. Sure i miss more often now but it didn't make a huge difference in long-range.

But increasing it more so will also nerf close-mid range for hunter which is the only place he is supposed to be good at? Well, have you guys seen scouts? In case you haven't; it is the class EVERY SINGLE SOUL plays at the high-end games. Their close range damage is comparable to hunter, as it is actually harder to miss than hit in a close/mid range combat. Not to mention they also have stopping power on their bows, if you are spamming melee and getting shot at by a scout at the same time, you will NEVER catch your target as you end up 2 steps behind...

More fall-off damage for hunter is a great idea and it makes total sense, the xbows aren't strong enough so they are doing less damage on range. But leave the recoil alone; we are already using AK-47 with pistol damage :|. And be a little objective, if you asking nerf for hunter, YOU HAVE TO nerf scout along with him. Im a terrible scout, my least played, not even drawing the bow and im still topping damage meters easily playing him like a hunter...

Oroibahazopi
25th Mar 2014, 13:17
One option would be to introduce true projectile weapons with less or no spread - this punishes long range accuracy based on the speed of the projectile (crossbow bolts would be slower/less accurate than Longbow arrows, for instance) and rewards skill, but is dramatically harder to use for low-mid skill players. This would require a significant adjustment to overall balance and isn't a simple rework, though, so it has not progressed beyond early consideration.
Personally I don't think it would be an issue at small to medium ranges, the vampires move so slowly you can barely even ADAD dance as it is. The lead you would need would be so minimal, you'd just lose the instant pops at vamps sticking their heads out around corners at those ranges.

If this is possible anything is ^^

jBe2mulaj0w

cmstache
25th Mar 2014, 13:30
I don't think close range would be affected much. Currently it's TOO easy to hit close range. I would probably welcome a slight accuracy hit anyways from close range. At least make people have to try to hit.


And the alchs are close range specialists, not hunters.

WhiteFlameKyo
25th Mar 2014, 14:14
I read the topic title as "Why hunters need to be removed" and was so going to agree.



And the alchs are close range specialists, not hunters.

For now, hunters are. You can easily solo a vampire in close combat even without using your bola. Alchemists can do this as well, but they need to actually use their skills (vampires have a chance to run away though, if they're smart enough). And it's harder to hit anything.

cmstache
25th Mar 2014, 14:32
My point wasn't that hunters aren't, but that they aren't supposed to be. They are a mid-range class.

Monowar
25th Mar 2014, 14:33
For now, hunters are. You can easily solo a vampire in close combat even without using your bola. Alchemists can do this as well, but they need to actually use their skills (vampires have a chance to run away though, if they're smart enough). And it's harder to hit anything.

I think the issues that the hunters are facing are kinda similar to the problems faced by Assault Rifle based weaponry in all games - they are TOO balanced. We've seen this in Titanfall too - the Carbine has such a wide spread of situational usage that it totally eclipses all other weapons.

In addition to what everyone here's been saying I have a few suggestions

1. Decrease the accuracy at extended range : Basically, having a automatic sniper rifle that can accurately hit from across the map is a bit too much. Let the Scouts fill in the niche of being long range specialists. Hunters should be most effective at mid-close range

2.Increase Reload timer: Hunters are the intermediary between Scouts and Alchemists - they shouldn't be so effective at close quarters as to replace Walter White's disciples. Giving them a longer reload timer would really force them to make a choice, especially if combined with the aforementioned accuracy reduction . They can either engage a vampire at long range where they are less accurate, in the hopes of doing some damage before they get up close or they can save their clip and unleash it all on a vampire at mid-close range where they are much more likely to hit.

This favors the risk-reward gameplay system and would probably make the Hunters less enfuriating to go against while, at the same time, keeping them viable.

cmstache
25th Mar 2014, 14:35
The reload timer is a thought...