Alright, last chance.
Explain to me how a chainsword-for-perk makes Tacticals stronger than Melta/Versaitility-for-Perk at melee range; and how adding a Chainsword to that mix explicitly makes it overpowered.
|
|
|
Alright, last chance.
Explain to me how a chainsword-for-perk makes Tacticals stronger than Melta/Versaitility-for-Perk at melee range; and how adding a Chainsword to that mix explicitly makes it overpowered.
#52
Stalker Bolter (for long range snipeshots), Plasmagun or bolter (mid and non-pointblank general purposery shooting), Chainsword (now fulfilling the purpose melta previously filled).
Weapon Versatility and Serrated Blades.
Grenades.
Problem officer?
I think the aspect you're not getting is that currently a Tac needs to use a melta to survive melee range combat. By changing serrated blades he can just get his chainsword for that stuff, which frees up a weapon versatility slot for something else. It's not that melta = chainsword. It's that your suggested change removes that choice from people, so it ends up being a huge buff overall because now, suddenly, tacs are pretty damn good at every range they can fight at. Right now it's 'pick 2 of 3'. Your suggestion is 'olol have it all guyz'.
That's a fucking huge buff.
edit. I'm not saying that the current combat blade isn't worthless, and I'm not saying that Serrated Blades also isn't worthless. We all know that they are. Making serrated blades give a chainsword isn't a terrible idea, but it has ramifications, and frankly, tac marines are already pretty good shooty so I don't get the fascination with them also being good in close combat. Sure, some people would prefer to be slamming around with a cool chainsword instead of your shitty butter knife, but we're not going to see mutually exclusive perks in the game. Ever. And with that in mind, the combo I mentioned above makes tac's awesome, since as long as they can shoot more damage off an ASM than the ASM can take off with a ground pound - not that hard, assuming you have a pulse, since the tac roll of awesome gives you so much free damage -, the tac wins a melee fight against a dedicated melee class. This is wrong, and should never be an option.
Tac melee needs to be good enough to melee dev's to death and no more. Either that's by hugely nerfing dev melee, or figuring out some other way to do it, or whatever, but it's not as simple as 'just give him a chainsword' because that means he wrecks ASM's as well.
Last edited by Ap0k; 19th Nov 11 at 10:23 PM.
See, that's the first logical post against all thread long. Well-said, Apok, and valued insight.
#54
I made none of those points, of course. Perhaps I said it in the other thread before we took it here? Not sure.
Thanks for p0kky for laying it out clearly, and avoiding any irritation inherent in my posting manner
I am an Iron Warrior! Iron Within, Iron Without!
Stalker Bolter is already a weapon competitive with all other Tac weapons for general purpose shooting (and arguably superior due to its DPS). This is a self-inflicted nerf from Stalker-Melta. What you are missing from your perception is that the current Stalker-Melta combo is already "a have it all scenario." Melta isn't about survival. Melta is about becoming superior at face to face melee range combat relative to Assault to ward them off from non-ambush jumps.Stalker Bolter (for long range snipeshots), Plasmagun or bolter (mid and non-pointblank general purposery shooting), Chainsword (now fulfilling the purpose melta previously filled).
Weapon Versatility and Serrated Blades.
Tac melee needs to be good enough to melee dev's to death and no more. Either that's by hugely nerfing dev melee, or figuring out some other way to do it, or whatever, but it's not as simple as 'just give him a chainsword' because that means he wrecks ASM's as well.
There are two elementary problems with the second quoted statement. First, sword on the ground loses to sword from the sky. This has been a fact of ASM duels for so long that an ASM duel basically comes down to grenades, shooting, and a hyperactive jet pack dance. Tacs simply lack initiation that is actually the reason for ASM melee success. Roll doesn't cut it for initiation - you don't prevent the opponent from escaping melee range, and you are vulnerable mid animation. Two, if you hugely nerf devastator melee, Devastators will be helpless against ASM post-ambush. But we've been on that argument already.
Now, perhaps you are right that Tacs don't *need* to be given another melee option. That they are ultimately a shooty class with utility as opposed to an in-between Devastators/Assault. I would even agree that I am largely for the Chainsword-for-perk for flavor/variety purposes (for buffing Tac melee in general I suggested the should stun/base knife change). But if you believe that that Tacs are already not competitive at all ranges and are already not in the stage that they can regularly dominate Assault in melee ranged combat with their current option... we must be playing different games. I hunt Assaults with Meltas. I treat Melta Tacs as the single most dangerous enemy on the melee range as an Assault. Yet, I treat grounded Assault as free kills. From my perspective, I don't see how being downgraded to Assault, no less than Assault (depends on whenever you value survival of the roll over initiation of the Assault), melee prowess wise is going to make Tacs overpowered.
But seriously, just try it. Try to let an Assault smash into you on the ground and retaliate with melee as an Assault. That should give you ALL the information you need to know to realize why Chainswords on Tacs won't change a damn thing in the general ASM vs. Tac hierarchy.
I guess I should state it more directly because I suspect I am going to get a list of examples of how a Tac can murderize an Assault with the sword if he dodges the ground pound. The point there is, if you dodge the ground pound in the first place, you've already won that stage of the fight against the Assault. Whenever you fill him up full of Plasma, Bolter Round, Grenades, Melta, or use the hypothetical shiny Knife/Sword is details - the Assault fucked up and now is now at a disadvantage.
Last edited by konfeta; 20th Nov 11 at 11:33 AM.
#56
So if Melta is already superior for tac's in melee range then what is the point in giving him a chainsword?
Variety means bugger all in balance discussions. If the core of your argument is that you just want to use something different, then tough. The only way you would use a chainsword over a melta for close combat would be if it was better than the melta, and if it's better than the melta then it's broken.
So what exactly is your point, and why are you perpetuating this discussion if you, in essence, agree with practically everything that's being said in the counter-arguments (i.e chainsword for tac = unnecessary). It's like you're just arguing for the sake of doing so, since we seem to agree that melta is currently fine for tacs dealing with ASM's.
To buff a worthless perk.
Variety may mean bugger in all balance discussions, but the point of balance is to have bloody variety in gameplay. Or do you think we should just reduce the game to a single ideal class load out each? Options don't need to be perfectly balanced between each other. Options need to be balanced enough to be viable and fun to play with. This is ESPECIALLY true when both sides can be mirrored.
If we judge that Tacticals melee outside of Melta should be viable to kill Devastators at that engagement range, we don't do it because Tacticals are incapable of filling him up with headshots and hence are incapable of killing Devastators at close ranges, we do it because we want Tacticals to be able to kill Devastators in melee combat.
#58
The point of balance is not to have variety in gameplay. That is not balance.
If we reduce the gameplay to one class with one possible weapon and perk, then yes, that would be balanced. But that wouldn't give us variety. Thus, variety in gameplay is not balance. In fact, more often than not, variety complicates balance.
And again, if the problem is with Devastator melee, nerf Devastator melee. It's that simple.
So seeing that Dev melee is a problem in comparison to Tactical melee, a good course of action would be to first nerf Devastator melee - particularily stomp - and THEN look at Tactical melee and see how it compares.
This game is mirrored. Both sides, all other things equal, are perfectly balanced. If Assault are super imba, both sides can spam Assault. If a specific Perk/Weapon load out is game breaking, both sides can just use that and nothing else. The game is already perfectly balanced with perhaps a few very minor map side differences. Everything else, the three classes, the different perks and weapons, they are all about variety in gameplay - the entire purpose of having them balanced is to ensure that all of them are viable, so that a player can pick up his favorite play style and don't feel like he is ez-moding or being punished for preferring that playstyle. Balance of power in the options is the direct means to an end - a varied gameplay.The point of balance is not to have variety in gameplay. That is not balance.
Poor balance destroys variety in gameplay. Good balance enables it. The two are intrinsically related by purpose and effect. Is the gulf of difference in perception really that great that you don't see this?
Allow me to paint the reason why I don't want to see Devastator melee nerfed from that specific perspective, especially in terms of listed suggestion, - as an Assault, this dramatically reduces my variety in gameplay. Devastators will go from being vaguely capable of defending themselves in melee to being automatic kills on successful ground pounds. I lose an entire dimension of gameplay from assault play. The game becomes less varied. Easier. Less fun.
#61
You do know that your second 2 paragraphs are at completely opposite ends of the argument, depending on where you apply that reasoning? Poor balance is why Dev's, in almost every case, run with Iron Halo (and frequently FNP, but occasionally you see a few of the other perks). Poor balance is why Tac's, in almost every case, run with weapon versatility (though again there are exceptions). The only class that really shows any diversity in it's perk loadout is ASM, since they have impenetrable/DFA/ACT and maybe one or two other viable perks to choose from, but again, it's not exactly wildly varied.
Whether you find killing dev's in melee vaguely interesting is completely irrelevant. The problem is that Tac's can't do it (or rather, they can, but they can't do it with the regularity they should do it). And they can't do it from range either. You can't buff tac melee ability for the reasons I mentioned above (because it would have to be better than using a melta, and better than using a melta means it's totally broken), so you have on option remaining. Tweak dev's and see where things are after that.
If a tac marine can't kill a dev in melee, and can't kill a dev from range, and an ASM can't kill a dev from range, and has maybe a 50% chance of killing a dev in melee, then I honestly don't care what you may or may not find fun. The simple fact remains that if Dev is guaranteed to win 3/4 of those situations with a 50% chance of winning the 4th, he's on top of the food chain, and that is not balance.
8v8 balance is all well and good, but the 8v8 balance will remain regardless of what gets changed in class vs class matchups. The game barely relies on your team mates to work in a co-ordinated fashion to achieve victory, and I'd imagine the vast majority of people play it for their own personal fun, regardless of whether their team wins or loses. It's not fun playing a class that, by default, simply can't fight certain opponents unless the odds are stacked in it's favour already. Nobody is saying that each class can't kill every other class, but certain perks allow terrible players to beat, or force a retreat from players much better than them on a regular basis. People should be doing well at the game because they're good. Not because the game gives them a crutch to prop up their ego with. If you suck at something, get better at it.
There's no gulf in perception konfeta, I get what you're saying. I'm simply telling you that you're wrong.
#62
I honestly can't believe I'm asking this, but do you even play Space Marine MP? I mean, I know that you do, but you don't seem to be showing that you do.Originally Posted by konfeta
Devastators are currently far above being "vaguely capable of defending themselves in melee".
Addendum: this game is not mirrored; relying on team picks to balance the game out is like relying on competent pubs on 2Fort on TF2. Everybody goes Sniper, Spy and Engineer (with the odd ninja Pyro, if Gorb's on the server) and that's that. You cannot realistically state "If Assault are super imba, both sides can spam Assault.".
Why?
Because if one side has already spammed "super imba class/weapon/perk X", then they are already winning. The other side can then counter, but they are already trailing. That isn't even balance - that's simply how SM gameplay rolls.
Also, while balance in Space Marine is surprisingly good (and I know I regularly praise it), you can't claim that balance is "perfect" and then moan about Tactical melee capabilities not being balanced. Do you even know what you're trying to debate, konfeta? It seems to me like you've lost whatever thread you were pursuing previously.
I couldn't agree more. This is why I feel certain perks and/or combinations thereof are overpowered or outright broken...even certain weapons and innate abilities. I wouldn't be at all surprised if some players have been able to reach high levels from exploiting imbalances within the game to get kill counts that skill alone wouldn't have permitted in a more balanced system. Let's face it - almost all of the Perks grant a clear advantage to a player with no tradeoff aside from the use of a slot. No negatives at all to offset whatever positive modifier is conferred on the player. A Dev with FNP and IH gains added resiliency to ranged and cc damage but only sacrifices the ability to use other perks. He's rewarded with the ability to survive all but the most powerful weapons. An Assault with FV gets a free kill (several if he's very lucky) if he dies close to his attacker.It's not fun playing a class that, by default, simply can't fight certain opponents unless the odds are stacked in it's favour already. Nobody is saying that each class can't kill every other class, but certain perks allow terrible players to beat, or force a retreat from players much better than them on a regular basis. People should be doing well at the game because they're good. Not because the game gives them a crutch to prop up their ego with.
i've noticed that a Combat Knife requires at least 6 swings to kill a Dev with FNP + IH, during which time the Dev can readily stomp a Tactical flat.
trollface.jpeg Problem, Tactical?
On a side note, Guess why I prefer playing private games with Perks turned off. Hint - it has to do with leveling out the playing field.
@Apok
Hardly at opposite ends. We just disagree which parts of the game are specifically imbalanced, and I disagree with the notion that the good perks need to be nerfed. The bad perks in this game don't change gameplay, nerfing things to their level will be toxic for the game.
Whenever Assaults slaughter Devastators in melee or not IS NOT irrelevant. Nerfing Devastator melee will accomplish that situation. You will be exchanging one imbalance for the other. Buffing Tactical melee will not cause the same balance swing before Assault and Tacs, in fact, it won't even nudge it. But we disagree there as well. Moving on.
The only Devastator vs. Tac at range balance is far more diverse than you are implying. And if Devastator vs. Tactical ranged is decidedly 50/50% fair, Devastators are now pointless because they will be slower Tacs without access to map control perks. But, once again, this has been discussed to death and I've made my position clear - I expect Devastators to be favored in a ranged match up and, from my perspective, Tacs are more than capable of beating Devastators at ranged (the only exception to this rule is high skill Lascannon users which is a separate topic).
Nobody is saying that each class can't kill every other class, but certain perks allow terrible players to beat, or force a retreat from players much better than them on a regular basis.
Quite frankly, I am at the point where I want to say that if a terrible player is giving trouble to a much better player with any of the perks currently in the game with the exception of double perk grenades, the better player is not as good as he likes to think he is, both in his physical skill and his own perk choice. Since that is where balance discussions completely burn up, I drop the issue and will wait until Reric decides to do what they deem best. Sincerely, I hope they take the road of buffs instead of nerfs.
@Gorb
They are very capable of defending themselves in melee against Tacs, whose melee is, topically enough, terrible. Assault, well, I refer to the above statement, we will agree to disagree.
As for your addendum, read my post on balance again. The balance as far as win-rate is concerned is innately always perfect, the rest is up to players. I would even go as far as say that balance between the three classes is exceptionally good for an assymetric game, with the only glaring issues godmode issues being Lascannon skill:reward ceiling and MC/FotA grenadiers. The only balance that matters is the one that expands diversity of playstyles within those classes. We see that certain weapon/perk load outs are favored over others. I am of the opinion that current "strong" perks should be the standard, because the weak perks fail to noticeably improve the gameplay when chosen.
No more, no less. And, hence, as per topic, I see that Tactical melee options outside Meltagun are a lacking playstyle that I feel should be enabled. No more, no less. The Assault/Devastator tangent is to point out the folly of nerfing Devastator melee instead of buffing Tac melee. But, as now pointed out numerous time by everyone, this has gone cyclical. The core assumptions differ, it seems that I won't convince you of my belief, you won't convince me of yours.
konfeta, forgive me for being dense but I'm trying to understand why you referring to the Melta Gun as a melee option as technically it's a ranged weapon.
I think it would be more correct to consider it a ranged weapon option for dealing with dedicated melee combatants / assaults.
That argument only works if the assumption that the "better player" really isn't as good as he says it is is actually correct. Your argument ignores the possibility that there are good players who actually are as good as they say they are and it's more than reasonable to assume that they do exist. Better players that rely on skill CAN be consistently beaten by lesser skilled players via particular loadouts that more than compensate for the skill disparity.Quite frankly, I am at the point where I want to say that if a terrible player is giving trouble to a much better player with any of the perks currently in the game with the exception of double perk grenades, the better player is not as good as he likes to think he is, both in his physical skill and his own perk choice
To support my statement, I will freely admit that I have wasted better players than myself with nothing but PC spam and IH+FNP and stomp. Hell, I've killed very good Assaults in CC...and what saved my ass was FNP + IH and stomp spam.
I'm in favour of a buff to Knives...but I also feel we ought to wait and see what happens to the melee dynamic when Dev Stomp is nerfed so that it requires more skill to use.
tacs unmodded blade is almost ceremonial (prob due to melee system's loose interrupt/hit detection).
Less meltacheaping; serrated perk is handy for trading blows with asm & carving devs.
I find little use unmodded blade like the asm axe (slow & short range).
Pity really, most tacs load out tend to melta for melee or go full ranged.
it'd great to see a normal blade rush a melta spammer. stun & chain combo the stinky roller. might get melta'd toes from knocking initial blast out of the way but nonetheless prevail.
melee system'd need tightening up to allow such lengthy combos. with that in mind unmodded blade could lockdown an asm (skill & timing would be required - where simple button mashing'd fail)
good idea, granting tweaked melee to pistol wielding, also pistol stance lends an noble swagger.
Last edited by dirtyprotest; 21st Nov 11 at 6:02 PM.
Or even a slight buff to melee damage when wielding a pistol if tinkering with the knife's weapon speed proves problematic (which it MIGHT due to the need to sync with animations and all).
speed would be less of an issue if melee interrupt/hit detection were improved.
There've been threads based on tweaking/fixing stun alone
(eg Melee stuns - WHAT IS THE POINT!? )
*cough*Mutuallyexlusiveperkchoices*cough*
*sneeze*Offsettingbuffsanddebuffs*sneeze*
Also, if it does keep it with a knife, it'd be nice for it to be an appropriately killy and flash knife if you have Serrated on.
But yeah, nerf Devs first, then we come back to this.
It's a melee range weapon, it outperforms other melee weapons, thus its functionally a melee weapon. Mechanical differences do not change the essence of its function - melee combat superiority. Other ranged weapons can be used in melee range, but this is where the mechanical disparity starts to create a functional disparity. I view it akin to comparing a horse, a bicycle, or a car (albeit this is an exaggerated example) - different objects, same basic function.konfeta, forgive me for being dense but I'm trying to understand why you referring to the Melta Gun as a melee option as technically it's a ranged weapon.
Player skill isn't a smooth gradient, acquiring basic competence in a specific skillset can create vast gaps in performance. For example, its irrelevant how amazing you are as at most things Assault, if you are not running out of pistol ammo, you are not using a critical tool that defines match up win rates. I see even the most incredible Assault players with supernatural timing/positioning neglect this. You see this sort of thing all over Space Marine - people with fantastic aim standing still or always fighting in aim mode (death sentence), grenades thrown at the enemy instead of where he is trying to go for cover, etc.To support my statement, I will freely admit that I have wasted better players than myself with nothing but PC spam and IH+FNP and stomp. Hell, I've killed very good Assaults in CC...and what saved my ass was FNP + IH and stomp spam.
If you want an RTS comparison, think of it this way - you can cheese/rush a significantly better player and decidedly trounce them. However, if the significantly better player also knows to scout and recognize such things, good luck beating him unless he spaces out. You can use a type of play he is decidedly unprepared for (doesn't know to deal with harassing with air units even though he can beat you in macro/micro/whatever). Etc.
Then tell us, how would you fix the Serrated Blade perk?The point of balance is not to have variety in gameplay. That is not balance.
Share with us your wisdom.
As it stands, Serrated is a worthless perk - logic dictates that either it needs improvement or removal and replacement with something actually useful for a change.
Now, many here have listed ways to accomplish the former, and I even listed one for the former that ensures it keeps its DPS, by slowing the melee speed in accordance to keep the damage lower and reduce chasing performance, so as to not step on the toes of the Assault. You have offered no real solution for how to fix this perk in the slightest other than telling us we can't fix it the way we have suggested - so I ask you - how would you fix this issue?
#73
I would replace it with something else, ideally. Unfortunately, we don't live in an ideal world and I surmise that the best we would get in terms of a Relic patch is a modification to the existing perk. I mean, heck, I'd like to revamp melee in it's entirety a fair bit (the fact that chained melee strikes are unblockable and unavoidable has always irked me - and yes, you can permachain with the Tactical Knife. It's quite a bit harder, due to the range/damage, but it can be done), but that's a bit ambitious.
So, in terms of modifying the existing perk, I would make it increase combat damage across the board (this includes damage dealt by charge/bull's rush, stomp combo, and so on), but only moderately. Less overall damage than the Chainsword, but with stronger combo attacks. The improved bull's rush would deal less damage than an Assault with Furious Charge, however.
This way you keep the range of the Knife, but you gain a boost to all combat-related mechanisms and attacks. Unlike a flat-out damage buff or a Chainsword replacement, this is something different to making it more similar to the Assault class, and prevents any kind of comparison with "melee Tact is dumb because Melta is superior anyhow". In my opinion, of course.
You can interrupt and escape melee chains with stuns. The issue is, as always, lag.
Regardless, the comparison "is dumb because melta" will still be made. Tac melee simply isn't reliable.
#75
It's as reliable as it is meant to be, bearing in mind that the Tactical has access to far more weapons than the Meltagun. The differences between an unperked Meltagun and melee combat aside.
r.e. interrupting melee combos, it's actually quite hard with the default chest-kick because the move is so damned slow. But that's a topic for another time.
Mostly I was thinking the hand-slam and shoulder-slam. At least, direct hits with those occasionally saved Tacs from my sword. Very rarely, though, because in most attempts I end up getting stunned after I finish the Tac off.
I would have no issues with the above except that you argued against modifying the existing perk at length.I would replace it with something else, ideally. Unfortunately, we don't live in an ideal world and I surmise that the best we would get in terms of a Relic patch is a modification to the existing perk.
#78
I don't actually think I did - I was simply against the inclusion of the Chainsword or the idea of buffing the Knife DPS to match that of the Chainsword. I could be wrong, however; discussion did branch out over a few threads.
Haha I wondered how it looked at the other end. backfist interrupt is inconsistent at best , countering a chainsword can be tough, forget about suppressing a melta blast.
Could be stun effects when pesky fist strikes the nose, rather than a solid arc that persists for the duration of animation.
dream of a working stun allowing combat blade to strip armour & set up bolt pistol execution shot
Last edited by dirtyprotest; 28th Nov 11 at 5:16 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
