Since everyone paid money for the product, everyone's opinion and right to be listened should be equal. Those who make it a big part of their time to study and learn everything there is to know about the game, can and will simply win discussions with proper arguments and earn the right to be listened first anyway.
Everyone wants to have fun and at no point during anything I've ever written did I ever suggest anything that would remove any element of fun from any player other than those using overpowered equipment; any casual player will be playing the game rather than complaining on the forums beyond maybe one or two whine posts when they are outplayed, balance debates are never fun as much as they are an uphill struggle, writing practically an essay on a game's balance situation and certain equipment most certainly isn't fun and yet those with a vested interest do so, fun and balance being maintained by the knowledgeable are not mutually exclusive. That is pretty much my point although anyone who raises a good point with sufficient evidence should and will be heard, we'll have to agree to disagree I suppose. Honestly, as long as the forums don't devolve into Planetside 2 levels of idiocy and whinging, I'll be fine, no doubt the competitive communities will take the forums by storm regardless, the problem however would be if Behaviour starts listening to people who simply come to the forums and whinge, that is the biggest fear I have for this game and one of the core reasons why Planetside 2 flopped, people came to the forums to complain about things that were in practically perfect balance, offered a solution and SOE caved due to the quantity of players who were complaining, who were no doubt part of a vocal minority as the majority of PS2 players didn't really touch the forums, filled with too much complaining, not enough evidence yet they were still given the time of day. All Behaviour really has to do is ignore the people who complain and listen to the ones who offer solid debate. And yet people will still open their wallets and pay for the game if they want to play it just as everyone who has already paid for the game has, having fun with the game and offering balance suggestions are different things and at no point would anyone be prevented from playing the game, just from balance debates. The former is false looking at historical evidence from games in the same genre and other MMOs a few years after launch or possibly even just one year after launch, depends on the quality of the product further down the line, you'll have casual players sticking around with the game for a few months/years after launch but you'll probably be surprised, much like Planetside 2 in 1 - 2 years down the line the main, active and most numerous player-base will be the competitive communities that form around the game or come to the game, the ones who bring large player counts to enjoy the large-scale combat the game offers, It happened with Planetside 1, It happened with Planetside 2 and it'll most likely happen with Eternal Crusade. The latter I can understand even if I disagree when it comes to game balance. Agree to disagree I suppose, I'd rather have balance suggestions from the knowledgeable than people who simply come to the forums to whine in large quantities. Didn't happen with Planetside 1 or 2, most likely won't happen with Eternal Crusade. People who become experienced with the game might be able to convince a few skilled players that the game functions as they say but the amount of people who simply ignored all of the evidence and went on to whine was ridiculously high on both Planetside games, as long as Behaviour makes sure never to give the time of day to someone who has come onto the forums simply to whine about issues that don't exist, all should be good. Could be better, but good at the least.
Well. It's kinda obvious ( at least I thought so ) that devs shouldn't (wouldn't) listen to baseless whining. But then there's a question about who is to decide what is a reasonable opinion/argument and what is the baseless whining. I for example count my comment about speed and distance of the melee-attack-dash totally reasonable. Why? 1. Distance and speed of it make it seem unfitting for the assault class. It's more in the style of warp spider. IMO. 2. The already inbuilt mobility of assault (his jump pack) will leave no reason to take cover for tacticals and especially devastators. Assault will be able to land basically anywhere in the area of 10-20 meters of those in cover and get to them in mere second or two without even using additional fuel. (Might be a little exaggeration, since I don't exactly remember the distance for one dash). 3. Hitting a target that dashes almost as if it was teleporting isn't really an option either. Quite sure that a lot of people would count what I wrote as "whining" and some others wouldn't... Who is right? Don't know. Everyone and anyone can make mistakes and draw wrong conclusions. Another thing in game development is that if a big enough number of people come online and start complaining about something, then it could also mean that devs designed the game in manner that makes people play it the wrong way. The number of complaining players should of course be above a certain number to properly represent the player-base. Example of that would be the development of Amnesia. If I remember right, at first they had weapons in the game. When testers started complaining about how weapons were useless, devs decided to rethink a whole lot and take weapons out. (Don't take my word for this one though. Just trying to remember what a dev from that team said at a lecture/seminar some years ago...) Sorry for butting in here. In my opinion that way of thinking is like a double edged sword, that can just as easily kill the game. Communities - no doubt are important, but the game and those communities grow only thanks to new players and they don't always start playing being all-knowledgeable. At some point players quit their communities for one reason or another - family, work, sickness, travelling around the world... Who'll take their place? Someone new. If the game is made only by and for these communities, then there's a big risk that a new player will feel out of place and leave the game. I'm not saying that new and casual players should be in focus though. Both sides should be considered for a healthy growth of the game as a whole.
I'd say that it's probably the hardest to translate assaults to the shooter genre from the tabletop. Because on the table top they're nasty as hell as well. Very quick. Most players acn get assaults across the board in one turn, where they will proceed to maybe tear up your tacticals. They get three attacks on the charge so they're nasty but tac's also have decent armor and the same WS/BS. Hrm. I suppose I think of the assault like I do the Pyro in TF2. The pyro is a great flanking class, or ambush class, but charging head on is not really an option because he's squishy enough and close range enough he'll not get to you before you kill him if you're paying attention.
Every game has it's power users and average players. All of these are still customers and have a right to voice their opinions equally. We, as Founders, have a responsibility to all of the community that will eventually grow to surround this game to make sure that they understand core gameplay and systems so that they can enjoy it to the fullest extent. If "casuals" are coming to the forums to whine, we should be the front line to find out why they are whining and try and bring them up to speed politely, to ensure they continue to enjoy the game and to give EC legs to last for many years so WE can continue to enjoy it. If we do our part here on the forums or fansites it will mean less work for the devs that have to try and re-imagine game aspects that may be putting off the average users. An example: A recent MMO with pvp was having a tremendous surge in negative comments about the state of pvp from average users on their forums. This game was designed with ability priority, varying speed abilities, and abilities that would fire on keypress or after animation. Animation cancelling became a thing that the "hardcores" became accustomed to but that was not clearly explained within the frame work of the tutorials or company web pages and forums. It turned into a stereotypical forum argument where the HC players were simply telling the newbs to L2P. This is the vitriol that needs to be actively avoided and the time to start getting into that mindset is now. In my experience, your average player is the kind of person that sees and ad for a game or sees it on the shelf and thinks "This looks interesting." They take it home, play a few times a week, share it with some of their gaming buddies and don't usually spend much time on forums or fansites or guildsites. When these average players get frustrated enough with some mechanic or aspect of the game to break the seal on the forums, we have a vested interest in helping them, getting to the root of their frustration, before they bail. If LOTS of them break the seal we need to be the ones posting videos, writing guides, giving critical thought to their perception of the problem. It is, after all, our community.
I was wondering if the damage / stun scaled to how high the player was? So at max jump height you deal max damage and stun, and at lower heights damage decreases and so does the stun chance. Maybe even a delay (or more of one) at the jump height as momentum shifts from upward to downward motion? It's been awhile since I saw the video so I don't recall if there is a delay or not.
