Frequently Asked Forum Questions | ||||
Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts | ||||
Re: re: DMR Study Update (new spreadsheet) | |
Posted By: RC Master | Date: 2/1/12 6:46 a.m. |
In Response To: Re: re: DMR Study Update (new spreadsheet) (Hoovaloov) : So if we exclude full-on spamming as a tactic, and just focus on 4 spam + 1 : headshot vs. bursts of 2 + 1 headshot, it appears that 100% bloom : encourages the 4 shot spamming technique and 85% bloom encourages the : multiple reset technique. Or to put it another way, 85% bloom encourages : pacing even within this type of tactic. Lol - thats a bit of a stretch. 1 frame of difference is hardly enough of an advantage to be considered 'encourage.' As we see from your own pacing data, the only reason 4 spam shots + headshot might ever be considered optimal would be because it could be executed more reliably than reset after each shot due to reaction time errors creeping in. Also, considering full reset in 85% is literally 1 frame different from max ROF, you can't really argue that it's encouraged since the difference is so small! You could pace by mistake. If the difference between a perfect pacing kill and a 5 shot spam kill is a mere 4 frames, as we've discussed with the lag compensation, it basically becomes a toss-up whether either of you will win. Considering that a spammer could zoom in for their last shot, certainly at close and probably at medium range, they could secure the minimum kill time and a headshot. I've done this, not reliably, but I have and it works. : I would
: As for the NR, there's really only three options: 1) remove it completely,
: BTB maps need to take a closer look at player cover in TU gametypes. So wide
This is exactly the kind of rolling re-balancing that a good TU should not introduce - and 343i didn't do anyway so we're still left with an imbalanced game. Having to change map structure and ammo counts on every map is the WORST thing you can do since you've just broken familiarity and have to test changes all over again. Adding more cover on Hemmorhage, for example, might solve map-traversal issues, but then kills are going to be even harder to make at range since players in the open can run for cover more quickly. : If reducing bloom "breaks" Reach, then adding bloom will fix it,
: The problem with this is, since you have to wait a lot longer before the next
Firstly, short range would be unaffected since weapons like the AR and Pistol would still kill as quickly, yet the DMR would be less easy to use in those encounters. Secondly, the bloom getting larger, more quickly, does not preclude it also resetting more quickly. This way, if you fired faster than the optimal ROF, you would quickly get a screen filled with a huge reticle. But if you fired to cadance, you would kill as fast as you ever did. THAT would punish spamming. Simply reducing bloom does not and was never a stated design goal. : The other problem with this is, if spamming is punished this badly, you're
It's another layer of skill - timing. Which was part of the whole point to begin with. With a fixed ROF, everything above a certain rate of trigger-mashing is the same. Whereas with bloom, you need to hit the trigger within a certain range of consistent timing otherwise you're going to miss. Timing is a skill. Don't try and say it's not. : So what is the answer? I think the data shows that the TU does a great job of
LOL. The data shows that in theory unzoomed fights at close and medium range reward waiting for the full reset more in 85% than 100% Your more 'in practice' data does not say the same thing - it says pacers actually fire slower than the optimal rate and suffer for it more in 85%. A facet of the data which is now convieniently cast to the wind when it no longer supports your argument... Because lets be honest here, the most important thing is not how it works in theory, but how it works in practice. In practice, a difference of 1 frame in shot timing is very little. Perhaps you mistyped, but the data makes no statements on how fun the DMR is to fire, either.
|
|
Replies: |
The HBO Forum Archive is maintained with WebBBS 4.33. |