{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by [ＳiＮ]大き氷:
11/27/2015 7:29:41 PM
15
![[ＳiＮ]大き氷](/img/profile/avatars/default_avatar.gif?cv=3983621215&av=3239689559){kind=avatar}
How about I bump to disagree.
Don't misunderstand I agree that PvE could do with some work on how it plays but I don't believe it's a problem caused by PvP. If you guys find balance to be a problem so much you might try giving examples instead of the constant separate PvE PvP threads. It's what people suggesting PvP balance ideas do, regardless of what is going on in PvE. For example while the upcoming nerfs for shotguns don't seem problematic the damage before the patch was quite nice.
Not that I'm really picking sides, I think balance and overall satisfying gameplay is a problem on both. Also referred to as the entire game but I don't want to lose your attention. Which lastly I'll stress the problems have nothing to do with the fact that things act the same way across PvP and PvE. At least not necessarily, sure you could solve it that way but it's not needed and quite arbitrary.
English
-
shotgun is a good example at launch shotgun was great for PvE decent range but required getting closer than you would normally like but you could use it on majors/bosses but in PvP a insta kill weapon..... with that range.... on such small maps..... it just screams OP so range nerf then afew patches later damage buff the range nerf is very good for PvP but in PvE it puts you within range of most enemies insta kill melee of most bosses or majors but the damage buff was so ridulous that when used right could destroy enemies whch sounds ballanced but makes the shotgun into a..... [i]"im gonna run up close enough to hug that enemy n either it will die or I will"[/i] situation n Im not sure what its like atm similar thing with AR in PvE at launch awesome but in PvP the maps are so small there are barely any encouters that weren't within an AR's range so whats the point of a SR (which shines in situation outside of an AR's range) when all encounters are with an AR's range?
-
Edited by [ＳiＮ]大き氷: 11/28/2015 7:29:18 PMNot sure what to say. I see how they affect the two, but of course that's not necessarily a concern. So long as they are effective in their intended range I'm fine with it. Which at the very least damage adjustments should be able to fix that much by itself if they are not. Then again, concerning PvE, there are more problems than weapon balance. You kinda touch on it when you mentioned a bosses oneshot AOE melee. Though that's another issue.
-
I think best way to some it up the scale/distance of fights in PvE are bigger than PvP so when they balance for PvP all our PvE weapons fall short but when you balance for PvE you get shotguns killing from across othersides of rooms and yeah that is another issue more with gameplay mechanics than weapon tweaks but they do only make the problems worse with so man mechanics telling the player not to get too close
-
There are plenty of examples. We've had this argument several times before. And we've given alternatives that keep changes to PvP.
-
I was more saying it should be done more often, not so much that it is not done at all. Whether it is about balance in terms of the two modes being separate or not is another thing. Balance being not just what a gun and our abilities do, but the enemies we fight and how they respond as well. --------Though I'd be lying if I said I had any interest in discussing balance should the two be separate. It's simply arbitrary to me, balance is achievable with or without it. So of course I will opt for not putting in any unnecessary effort.
-
The problem is when things which are balanced in PvE take a huge hit for PvP reasons that renders them not fun and not good. E.g. Auto rifles, fusion rifles, hand cannons, and soon pulse rifles and shotguns.
-
Edited by [ＳiＮ]大き氷: 11/27/2015 11:03:21 PMWhich all assumptions, and both balance's and funs' subjectivity are debatable. I'd imagine you can understand that, and I've no interest in discussing it. Though I believe I've said plenty before and even now to give an understanding of where I'm at. Apologies if you haven't read any I don't blame you.
-
You say you don't think there's PvP caused PvE problem and then you don't want to discuss it. I'm confused about why you posted in the first place. As for subjectivity, it's a fact that all of those weapon classes were nerfed pretty hard for PvP reasons that negatively impacted both their utility and their enjoyment in PvE. I get not wanting to fight battles you've already fought too many times to remember, but then why bump to disagree at all? Were you more interested in the discussion originally and are just sick of it now? I get that. I'm sick of arguing about it too. Just trying to figure out what we're talking about here.
-
Well again I've said plenty here concerning it. For clarity I don't really care to discuss it further than that. Not out of arrogance but laziness frankly, what is there will have to do. You specifically responded to the examples bit, which I tried to keep it focused on that. However recently you are bringing up the PvP is killing PvE thing again. Which you got me with, bait intended or not I'm guilty for biting. I couldn't help myself with how it is assumed PvP is tearing PvE a new one. In both a documented and personal fashion. It's something I disagree with, why personally is obvious. Documentation is another, which is just that there's not enough, arguably anything, directly saying that is the case. --------I get that most discussions of balance center around PvP, hell exclusive to it even. To disregard any consideration they have for PvE simply because of that however I think is unwise. For all we know what is happening to PvE is what was intended all along. Last thing I can think to say is that if they make a mistake it's simply that. Nothing more to really say, just other ways of saying it. Which is what I was getting at before, not wanting to discuss it further and all.
-
I'm very tempted to get into this again. I disagree with your whole position basically. I do think we have clear examples etc. But honestly it sounds like we're both tired of this fight, and ultimately it's pointless. Bungie it seems is gonna do what they're gonna do whatever we think about it. So, you seem like a cool person. Gonna agree to disagree. Deal?
-
I too wonder what else can be said. Not because I don't get that we disagree on something but because I feel there's a misunderstanding somewhere and I'd like it to die. Regardless yes it is tiring with no success finding the answer. It'll pick back up at some point I'm sure. So for now it is a deal, yes.
-
Done. To working out our differences at a later date.
-
"Not really picking sides"? Really? The first thing you said was I bump to disagree, then complain about this thread not providing good suggestions while ironically not providing any yourself. My whole point is that you get a weapon, you really like it. It works great for all your pve needs. Then one day, it's garbage. You wonder why? . Then you realize that people were complaining about it being op in the crucible so they changed it. WHY? Why should there ever EVER be a reason to change the influence of a game you love. I love pvp,but I love pve more. There are many like me. What I'm asking isn't to be unfair to pvp so pve players can get what they want. Think of it like this dude - what you earn in pve should reward your pve game - What you earn in pvp should reward your pvp game and neither should have to touch eachother. Why is this a difficult concept? We already have armor and weapons you buy from the crucible vendors that cater to pvp and vise versa, so why should your guns in pve be changed or touched at all because of how it affects pvp or the other way around? I think that's pretty fair and a cut and dry explanation.
-
Edited by [ＳiＮ]大き氷: 11/27/2015 5:38:41 PMTo clarify I do not agree with the notion of separating the two, but I do not disagree with the need for PvE balance. At face value sure I am taking sides, but it's much more than that to me. Sue me. --------I'll stress that I understand the concept I just don't find it necessary. Chalk up everyone's problems to bungie's lack of understanding what people like about certain weapons. That and finding balance between what people like and what they are intended to be. It's a non issue to me frankly. It's not as though weapons wouldn't be touched if they were separate. Say they are separated though, and then things get nerfed all the same, your PvP excuse is gone. What's to blame next? Might be bungie's balancing in PvE in general. That's my problem, and it exists with or without separation. Separation isn't some magic bullet, but the placebo effect can be strong. --------Also I did provide an example, whether you read it as well as whether it was any good is another matter. Not that I suggested they need to be good. Anyway the only time I've ever seen weapon balance in PvE come up is in these sorts of threads. I find a more constructive approach much better, much like is done with PvP balance ideas.
-
Hey bigcory your an idiot STFU.
