{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
9/10/2015 7:11:16 PM
1
[quote]Based on the conversations in the reveal trailers and such it seems that Bungie is pushing to make the choices matter more (e.g., you can have your stability boost, but you sacrifice range), especially with the move to Foundries featuring different stat trees. This is a huge boost to customization, and when combined with the removal of reforging, use of the more restrictive perks helps to keep all weapons on more equal terms.
Crucible prior to 2.0 was basically Halo. Everyone was using the shotgun (yes, they have different names, but they have the same stats) or sniper (again, there are 2 options but they have high impact, Hidden Hand, and an Ambush scope), and either the Pistol (Thorn) or Battle Rifle (Red Death). Everything else was a second-class citizen.[/quote]
Since you're regurgitating bungies words as truth allow me to remind you that their excuse for nerfing gjallarhorn was exclusion. two weeks later they sold it and still nerfed it.
that said, the problem with perks weren't that they were overpowered, nor was it that customization was being hindered. it's that they left no room for growth. flared magwell, blast radius, the precious field scout, all were extremely high. how do you release new weapons that compete with perks that have no flaw? you don't. you nerf the shit out of them and create the illusion of power with the upcoming inauguration of weaponry. don't believe me? let's dig deeper.
tlaloc, the first curse, the chaperone, fabian strategy. ALL BRAND NEW EXOTIC WEAPONS. what's the binding thread for each of these? their signature perks are related to success. meaning if I get precision kills with said weapons (not all) my agility, stability and range are all improved vastly. go look them up.
why would [i]any[/i] of these exotics matter if black hammer exists? if I can max out my reload speed, hammer forged, shot package, or apply field scout to a weapon? they wouldn't. their perks would become nullified by the existing paradigm.
need more proof? two words: universal remote. every shotgun got their balls sliced off except for (lord of wolves is debatable though extraordinary as is) universal remote. it's range was increased by 10% and as it should have been. it wasn't exotic. matador, felwinters, party crasher felt more exotic even if by perception alone. the same reason hawkmoon was altered: people felt they were being one-shot too frequently even though the probability was astoundingly low.
I really encourage people to think for themselves and not spew iterations and recapitulations from people who regularly misguide and don't inform their patrons.
proof is everywhere. confirmation is nowhere.
English
-
You seriously mis-categorize my statements. I am not "regurgitating as truth". I am referencing from the developer why they are making the changes they are making. We are saying the same things, but with different perspective. You say: they nerfed all of the old weapons to make the new ones matter. I said: they changed weapon perks to make all weapons more equal. These are the same things, you're just upset because old weapons, which are being rightfully left behind, were brought into parity with HoW and Year 2 weapons. This causes you to take a negative viewpoint to the changes while I look at it as a good move to help grow the game. The exclusion of Gjallarhorn was very real. "HM VoG must be 34 with max Gally" The change was made to reduce [b]perception[/b] that Gjallarhorn is the only viable rocket launcher. The truth being that it is not the only rocket launcher, but it was far and away the best rocket launcher. Felwinter's and its ilk are still insanely good. I have died 0 times to a Universal Remote in the last 48 hours, and plenty of times to Party Crasher. Have you ever played a progressive game before? This is what happens, your old favorites become obsolete and you have to make new choices. This is a good thing, it keeps the game fresh. The truth is out there, Mulder.
-
Bare in mind Bungie perpetuated that perception that the Gally was the be all, end all of Destiny. From joking about it at E3 to the introduction of Cozmo as a new community manager, to the initial increase in vault space by teasing you with a picture full of Gallys to the BS that they don't control Xur's inventory. While changes needed to be made to the weapons, they're literally just screwing around with how they want to players to play their game and it's meddling and nagging and f*cking annoying.
-
Edited by unspoken threats: 9/10/2015 7:42:43 PMyou're such a status-quo kinda guy that I can't continue this discussion. "have you ever played a progressive game" "they did this to help the game grow" right, because neutering perks creates growth.
-
If not being into conspiracy theories and wild speculation is status-quo, then I guess I'm "status-quo". The portion of the community that believes that Bungie is out to get them or punish them baffles me. This is a company that has routinely given back to the community only to have a percentage of that community spit venom back at them. More viable weapon options is a good thing. More people playing more because it's not all about the carrot that is Thorn, Gjallarhorn, etc. is a good thing. The weapons that they have allowing people to participate in the activities they want to play is a good thing. This is growth. Why not be excited about the new toys we get on 9/15 and not butthurt because some old favorites are rotating to the Vault. It seems to me that you're the one longing for the status-quo.
-
you're mistaking my point of view as displeasure. it's not. it's nor a conspiracy. it is fact. they reduced the perks to make way for new exotics to shine. how do I know this? because no current exotic weapons enhance a players abilities other than, again, universal remote and no land beyond, which account for roughly 2/30 weapons. precision hits/aiming down the sight reasonably and, as allowed, maximize the stat foundation. with the release of TTK nearly half of the weapons reward players enhanced abilities [i]at the expense[/i] of previous perks being relegated. there has been a serious paradigm shift in year one perks and year two perks. the super-majority of year one exotic gun perks did not enhance the base stats of the weapon. year two exotic perks now enhance abilities, coupled with, advertantly, the minimization of general perks which completely annihilate all year one weapons but leaves year two to outstand it's younger generation. this does not coincide with their initiative of equality being met. it caters to the grind and the seeking of new and more powerful guns that will make all wielding-guardians more favorable. I think that is a fantastic idea. lying about why is not.
-
I'm going to jump in here because I see what you are trying to say and what unspoken threats was getting at. Although, personally I don't like how all Y1 content is essentially nerfed I am looking forward to using new weapons as I've spent countless hours using Fatebringer and am ready for something new. Some of the arms day weapons feel great btw. Having said that if I'm going to replace Fatebringer, I want it to be with an equal replacement. Making all of the old weapons/perks shitty so that they feel equal with Y2 isn't what I was looking for. Just think about it like this.......they always nerf as their go to option which has a negative connotation. The alternative could be to bump other things up which would have a positive connotation. Both achieve the same result but the latter would leave you feeling better about it and the community would be less pissed off. In my opinion, I think Bungie blew their wad early. The best weapons in the game came from vanilla Destiny. None of the other exotics were close with the one exception of the Lord of Wolves. Hell I was using Fatebringer at 300 until I leveled it up in HoW because it was still better than other more powerful guns out there. Where you see them making these changes to make the choice more meaningful, I read that and it sounds like marketing spin to me for we are out of ideas and this is the excuse we will give them for it. I've loved most of the changes they have made with TTK but the weapon tuning just plain sucks. Look at the release notes again and notice how many times you see reduced verses buffed. If they really want the crucible to be a level playing field they could make crucible only weapons and PVE weapons can't be brought into it. Then they could get the balance right and leave it that way. When they are constantly introducing this custom weapon or that custom weapon, it is always going to throw the balance off. This is why this problem doesn't exist in Halo as there are set weapons. They need to get to the point where they leave things alone or only change them for Crucible. I personally hate them trying to force me to use a weapon archetype that I dislike (pulse rifles) so that it makes their crucible spreadsheet numbers look more evenly spread. Let me use the weapons I want to use and be done with it. Maybe it wasn't the time to kill numbers that was causing pulse rifles to be left behind originally but rather the fact that people don't like burst shot weapons.
-
I like and agree with a lot of what you're saying. No argument on the "blown wad". The VoG weapons, particularly Vision of Confluence and Fatebringer are arguable for best in class. I also agree on the fact that Bungie has not done a good job at communicating to the playerbase over the past year, especially when it comes to changes. I feel that it is a bit of a catch-22 for them, in the sense that, if they go too detailed it goes over the head of the causal player, while the vague or glossed-over descriptions leaves hardcore players wanting more. I agree that weapon tuning should be separated between PVE and PVP. I assume this is not done more often becuase it is either technically difficult or Bungie feels it would disrupt the immersion of the game. I don't like the idea of Crucible-only weapons because then PVP really does just become Halo with Supers. I don't feel that the devs are so flippant to make weapon changes based on equal spreadsheet numbers. Scientific process: people aren't using pulse rifles, look at data, pulse rifles have lowest DPS, increase DPS, people start using pulse rifles. The BR was the best gun in Halo 3. Bungie fans like burst-shot guns :)
-
This is coming from a person that doesn't like the crucible. I don't have a problem with competitive shooters as a whole because I really liked Halo back in the day. I dislike the crucible because of the things that make Destiny special (cheap super kills, etc). I agree it probably is more difficult to separate them but I sometimes wish they would leave them alone because I like how my weapons feel when I get used to them and to all of a sudden it takes twice as many shots to kill something because it was wrecking in crucible really frustrates me. However I believe they said before they were making the changes because no one was using pulse rifles. They nerfed everything else and buffed them to try and get people to use them more because the balance was out of whack. They view that as being a bad thing because they designed all these toys and people are only using a subset of them. That could be for two reasons. One is that some are OP when compared to others and the second reason is that people just prefer that weapon type over another. I fall into the second category. I can use pulse rifles but I don't particularly enjoy them. I didn't mind the BR from Halo though so go figure. Maybe it was because the AR in Halo was so terrible for the most part that the BR seemed good in comparison. AR's in Destiny though are really good so I don't like to feel forced into using pulse rifles.
-
Went back in the archives: https://www.bungie.net/7_destiny-weapon-tuning/en/news/news?aid=12557 This was the 1.1.1 update that dropped autos by a bunch while bringing pulses and hand cannons up. They don't really expand on the buff to pulses other than to say that they weren't being used. I feel that an almost 10% increase in DPS to pulse rifles brought them to about right, so you could safely say their use prior to the 1.1.1 patch was largely based on low DPS.
