JavaScript is required to use Bungie.net

Forums

Edited by eternalazhrei: 6/23/2017 6:42:18 PM
60
I'm sorry, there's one important thing that informs this entire post, and it's rather inaccurate. I haven't really read much because I've noticed your graph, and as a statistical person myself, there's a HUGE problem with the data you've presented. It's cherry picked. I'll go back and read the whole thing after this and edit my post, but I want to deal with the graphs first. For the same reason that Destiny 2's PVP will be tracking "efficiency" rather than "K/D ratio", your graphs are inaccurate to the issue at hand. The data that you have acquired is cherry picked in that it supports your hypothesis but does not venture into the fullness of the debate. There is no understanding of damage totals, no seperation of add-only encounters from boss encounters (a key difference as players normally save heavy ammo in the former for use in the latter), and no observation of critical moments in these different activities. It also fails to take into account that there are very low numbers of bosses and sub-bosses (even though we often put a lot of heavy and special weapon damage into them) and they will each only count as 1 kill for 1 player, rather than each player getting that kill, and damaging a boss is a CRITICAL factor in many activities. As such, the graphs you have presented are not indicative of the argument as a whole. I will also say, personally, I am looking forward to the D2 gun system. But misleading graphs are still misleading. [b]Edit:[/b] Alright, here's my observations first. OP makes a lot of inferences and conclusions based on no evidence, but rather, conjecture and personal experience. In most of the paragraphs (and I'll give kudos for actually having proper paragraphs, a rare enough occurence online) after the individual activity graphs, there is no actual evidence presented. For instance, the assertion that people sit on their heavy and special until larger enemies require larger ammo is only one of many used playstyles. The assertion that in Destiny 2 the fights are more dynamic and we have more choices is inaccurate as well; the dynamic nature depends on playstyle options (which thankfully is still possible thanks to sidearms and SMGs being included in the "primary" slots) and we still only have 3 choices of weapon. This does not make it more dynamic, but rather it is likely a similar dynamic with a different feel. Now, for some counter-observations. Of course there would be a tendency to sit on our higher damaging weapons until we need to damage enemies with higher health. There are fewer, but they are a higher priority. However, this does not take into account the fact that there are multiple playstyles that REFUSE to cohere to this rule. For instance, many people who run with scout or sniper rifles for boss damage run with swords for adds. Many people like to run with shotguns to get up close and personal with adds, using a different playstyle than those with snipers. I'd also observe that this dynamic is still possible (as you can use an energy scout for bosses, but run a sword and handcannon for most adds). OP is very logical and very concise, however he is very biased and does not present a full picture of the functionality or statistics of the situation. I would be very interested to see what kind of post OP would make with more information and less biase, but for now I must conclude that OP is inaccurate. Let me finish by saying, once again, that I am looking forward to Destiny 2 and trying the weapon system. But I do also understand that for this shift in playstyle, we are not more free in our choices, we simply have different choices to make. We still only choose 3 weapons, and where we would have 2 that were only limited to 4 choices, we are now thankfully given 6 between them. [b]Edit Again:[/b] An observation I forgot to include; the data in Destiny 2 for kinetic and energy weapons will likely split the percentages for the primary usage in Destiny 1. This, however, would still not be indicative of a great overall change, as they are essentially the same kind of weapon for that category. This would only indicate a change in weapons system, not a change in the overall dynamic of the game. In other words, it wouldn't actually fix things. Certainly we will be using two weapons in one category rather than one, but once again that only changes ammo count, not playstyle.
English

Posting in language:

 

Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • oh. My. God.[spoiler]an intelligent counter-argument. I didn't think they existed on the internet. Well done sir[/spoiler]

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Excellent post

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Very well put together post sir.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Thank you. I appreciate that.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Agreed

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • It's not cherry picked. The only way to pull data of guardian.gg for percentages was for individual days. I used the most recent day they had stats available for. Be my guest and go input the parameters for longer. I did from Jan 1st. The lines were pretty straight across.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Please go back and compare the percentages used in your original post and compare them to how they were a few weeks before the Taken King launched (sometime around August of 2015). My guess is that you will see higher precentage use of your special and heavy weapons. Maybe not significantly higher, but I would guess that that would also be indicative of using your ammo sparingly and reserving it for harder enemies. Again, not disagreeing to disagree here but my take on your post is you are saying "People use their primary a majority of the time anyways so why NOT give them another weapon that they use often already?" But the reality is that people choose whether or not to use their special/heavy based on how much ammo they have for those weapons. In Y1, we had larger reserves, larger magazines, etc. So before you can even dismiss that players are relying heavily on their primary anyways you need to address whether this is a choice or something that has been imposed upon them through game design and game changes - which have been implemented primarily for PVP. I think there is a dynamic at work here where as the game has progressed, Bungie has made incremental changes to try to get us to rely less on our special/heavy weapons in PVP, but since balance is shared across both modes, that has also impacted how players have played in PVE. And one of the ways players have adapted as tools have been taken away from is is simply relying more on our primary to do the same jobs. That skews statistics. Your data is what it is, but it reflects the reality that PVE [u]players were already forced to adapt to because of changes made for PVP by relying more heavily on their primary[/u]. It does not reflect a player choice made on their own will because that was how they preferred to play. I could be wrong. Maybe you DID use your primary 99% of the time from Day 1 through today and you chose it to be that way. But for myself and many others, we would have made EVEN MORE use of our heavy/special weapons had we been able to carry more ammo with us. The bottom line is that EternalAzhrei is absolutely correct: there is multiple ways to play this game and Bungie should simply allow players to play the game in a way that they enjoy playing the game, not forcing a certain playstyle upon us.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • http://i.imgur.com/PQRc8Ip.jpg Only goes back to October 2015. Top 4 lines are ARs, Scouts, Pulse and hand cannons. Everything else is consistent at the bottom.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • That is unfortunate. By that time, Taken King had already launched and people had a two-week period prior to TTK launching to adjust to new changes made to our weapons tuning for both PVP and PVE, and some of those changes included eliminating field scout on LMG's, which DRASTICALLY reduced both magazine capacity and reserve ammo for weapons like Corrective Measure and other similar archetypes. I'm talking a 2/3rds hit. Patience/Time and other snipers that featured 6 round magazines got dropped to 4 or 3 round magazines in some cases, and then they implemented a penalty for swapping special weapons in PVE and PVP both - meaning if I swapped from a shotgun to a sniper mid-strike, I lost all my ammo. Follow that up in April of 2016 with a drastic reduction in overall sniper and LMG ammo reserves to further discourage use of snipers and LMG's in PVP, and those changes ALSO impacted PVE. Without that data, we can only assume that heavy/special weapon usage was generally higher pre-TTK than it was through Y2 and Y3 due to greater ammo availability and greater reserves. Its logical as your ability to make use of a weapon depends on how often you have ammo for that weapon. Again, the data is what it is. It doesn't tell us much about how players made use of special/heavy weapons before Bungie started to make incremental changes to curb their use in PVP, which also curbed their use in PVE. I don't think the pertinent question here is whether people primarily rely on their primary weapon for most activities in the game in its current state. I think the more pertinent question is whether people would have used their special and heavy weapons more often if their ability to do so wasn't already restricted. And I think that answer would have been yes. No disrespect man, but I just think its a poor argument to say "look, special/heavy use is limited anyways so why not take them away." If we overlook all the changes in the game that have occurred in the last two years to curb special/heavy use in general, then that argument makes sense. But I don't think you can or should discount that impact. People use their primaries more now because Bungie has done everything humanly possible to force people to rely on primaries, mostly for the sake of PVP. It's not a choice made on playstyle its a choice made due to changes made to the game for the sake of PVP. And might I add that many of those changes were made under protest by the PVE community.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • That's not his point

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Edited by eternalazhrei: 6/22/2017 4:39:25 PM
    The point wasn't for time period. The point was for what questions you asked and what kind of data you pulled, and you only asked one question for one kind of data. You did not select multiple relevant data pieces, but only the ones that supported your question. There are many more relevant inquiries for data that you could have looked into, but instead you supplied only one, kill count. You could have checked overall damage, and then checked to see if you could pair this with observation of time spent in boss encounters versus add encounters.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • There are no damage numbers available and damage numbers are moot. It doesn't change that were using our primary weapons for most of what we do in PvE and we don't know that there will be any correlation to D2 boss health pools.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • How in the hell can you say damage numbers are moot? They would be like, the most critical aspect of this whole debate, you hack fraud!

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Addition by subtraction is never a good thing

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • They aren't moot. An entire team probably spends half of their raid ammo on a boss. We use synthesis on bosses, and regularly heavy and special. Anybody who needs a primary synthesis gets made fun of for it. The only place I regularly see it happen is in the Totems before Warpriest for Oryx. And in your graph, each one of those bosses gets ONE kill count, for ONE player. There's a ton of adds that we DON'T care about fighting, that are PURELY fodder to spawn ammo for players to fight the BOSS, and the kills that we get on them don't matter to us, we really just care about the mechanics and the boss. And your kill count only graphs skew that result. If there are no damage counters, that's fine, I can imagine that that would be incredibly difficult to count. But you didn't even THINK to mention anything else, you CHERRY PICKED your data because it supported you instead of thinking it all the way through: Cherry Picking (also known as: ignoring inconvenient data, suppressed evidence, fallacy of incomplete evidence, argument by selective observation, argument by half-truth, card stacking, fallacy of exclusion, ignoring the counter evidence, one-sided assessment, slanting, one-sidedness) Description: When only select evidence is presented in order to persuade the audience to accept a position, and evidence that would go against the position is withheld. The stronger the withheld evidence, the more fallacious the argument. It's called logically fallacious. You didn't do the argument justice, and that's the point here. You may not have done it on purpose, but you did it, and when you get called out on it, you defend it instead of reassessing.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • I love that in liue of actually presenting any kind of counter argument, you just scream cherry picked over and over. Fun fact, just because you can link a definition doesn't make it correct. My data backs up exactly what I stated, we used our primary weapons way more than anything else in PvE. You want to claim there are all kinds of other stats that show otherwise, but you've failed to show any. So instead of researching dictionary definitions and pretending that's a counter, why don't you find something that actually backs your opinion?

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • wanna know why? Because you use your primary to kill small adds, you use specials and heavies to DAMAGE BOSSES this doesnt equate to a kill even though all the ammo is going into doing so that means the evidence is biased because nobody goes around using specials and heavy to clears mobs of adds that can be killed with one or two shots of primary weapons.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • And you know what D2 has LOTS more of? :)

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • From what we've seen in the reveal of the strike seems to be more bullet sponges in our future I just hope they lowered health pools to compensate

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Lol, bullet sponges. Okay.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • That's all that strike boss looked like to me lol nothing really changed other than his attacks / arena just like maloks tactics change he was just a bullet sponge boss

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • That fight was constant movement. Bullet sponge is stand in one place and shoot forever. What do you want a boss to be, one hit kill? I mean seriously? I'm genuinely curious.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Edited by Sherpa: 6/24/2017 6:36:23 AM
    Constant movement =/= mechanics Valus moves around his arena, he's a bullet sponge (well WAS a bullet sponge) My point is unless they drop the health pool it'll take forever to kill a boss using 2 damn primaries and the OCCASIONAL power weapon

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Play the fight. It wasn't Valus.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • I'm not saying the new guy is valus I'm saying they both have a lot of movement, the movement doesn't stop them from being bullet sponges, their overall health/the damage potential we have is what determines that From what I saw in the reveal he seems just like our current bosses that just moves a lot, as long as they lower the health pools from what we've had in D1 and are ACTUAL MECHANICS I think the change will be alright

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

You are not allowed to view this content.
;
preload icon
preload icon
preload icon