Personal thoughts on the two weapon systems

Excuse me for being unclear. I should have elaborated more.
Anyways, the current system we have is based on luck. ahole has maxed luck, and got those weapons in three straight matches. How in the world does that advance my xp gainage? I died almost immediately. Luck not only determines what tier you get, but it also now affects what you get in your starting deck. If you get weapons like that, no one can beat you unless they literally have the same. After thinking, I do think luck should have a play on this, but not as much of a play as it does now. I don't wanna have this whenever I play a person with maxed luck.

 

If you consider luck to be overpowered now, why were you suggesting to make the addition of luck also helping with minigames? Shouldn't you have been calling for a downright nerf on luck?

Or, better yet, upgrade luck on your own?

 

I simply adding minigames as something luck could do to get some other suggestions going. In reality, getting so many gears so easy probably wouldn't work out in the end. It was simply trying to get a ball rolling. Unfortunately, it has hit rough, and can't move on. Sad, because that would be a good topic on its own.

I only think luck needs a downgrade on the weapons aspect. Boxes show up so infrequently that it is fine otherwise. But the matches I had with ahole just took it to a whole new level of craziness... It shouldn't be as OP as it is on the weapons side.

 

You are just being sttuborn, already told why small community is not an excuse. And the point is not about ppl getting killed by low lvls... its about balance and low lvls having such an outcome against higher isn't balance. I'll no longer reply to sttuborn messages that only make me repeat what i said cause of lack of argument.

You are just being sttuborn, already said that in every game a low lvl will be beaten hardlly by a higher one... CoD is just another example, the new system is hurting this rule. I'll no longer reply to sttuborn messages that only make me repeat what i said cause of lack of argument.

Thats the point what i wanted to get with you... you and most ppl that support new system (with exception of mallard) is basing their opinions in the fact they are lower lvls and they want to beat higher... selfish reason. As for the lack of satisfaction with the new system i see coming from lower and higher lvls as equal and also as the main problem being something that reaches everyone... not a selfish act.

Are you unsatisfied with the fact you cant play much when your friends are not on? Wait for official realease or subject to the experience of being beaten by a higher lvl making your job very hard but possible and as you reach a higher lvl getting easier and easier to compete. THATS how its suposed to be. But no... ppl always want the short-cut... they want everything handed out for them. Think about it.

In addition i sugested on my first post here how to make a real balanced option that would benefit everyone and still keep the fair overpower higher lvls have over the lower ones. I dunno what else i can do to end this subject.

You're welcome buddy... thats what we're here for... discussions are needed for the improvement of the game

Than if we all dont dream and content ourselves with the game fading away... where this is going to take us? Kyle just needs to do 1 thing to make the game successfull. Advertisement. Get the money we payed him for the game and reverse everything to advertisement.

Thats how you invest on business... more players you atract more money you get and more you invest in the game and more you get... until its so famous and successfull that its self sustainable.

 

I feel like I'm repeating myself as well. We're both wasting our time. This is just going in circles due to a lack of understanding on both of our ends. I don't think its possible for me to make you see the light, and I don't think it's possible for you to make me see the light.

You can laugh in my face and I will take it once this game flourishes to the point you except it to, but for now I'll be sitting in my corner with my tin foil hat screaming "the end is near!". Well, not really the end, just perpetually small.

I will continue to say until the day I die that there is nothing wrong with a level 20-40 player occasionally beating a maxed level player. Underdog moments like that are what keep the games fresh and exciting. But since we all have different ideas of "fun" I can't convince you otherwise, no matter what niche argument I try to conjure up.

As I exit with my head not high nor low, I will continue to plug my pick/ban suggestion since I feel it will fix some of the innate luck related problems with the current system. Feedback on how to improve it would be nice, since I kind of just used filler numbers that aren't at all based on how many weapons are currently in the game.

 

lol, are you for real? Advertisements are very expensive. Also keep in mind he has to pay for three total servers, SSL1, SSL2 and the Steam version. That is a lot of money....

 

Yeah i know... the funny is... you say something and i argument agaisnt it... and instead of coming up with new argument you just repeat what you said previously. Thats why sttuborn and tiring. But well... i cant crack humans heads... ppl are determinate on what they believe even when its not beneficial for the majority.

I just hope someone with a better voice than mine come up to fix the flaws of this system... i dont want the old one... i just want the best option that makes the game balanced and enjoyable to everyone... without short cuts and spoiling immediatist people... my sugestions got throwed in the garbage apparently... so i'll just wait and hope for the best.

 

You know why we were both repeating ourselves? Because we both have contrasting, concrete opinions that can really only be said one way. My opinion is that there is nothing wrong with a level 20 sometimes killing a level 80, your opinion contrasts that. There's not much more to it, and that's why I realized I'm wasting my time

 

Yeah... your opinion just go agaisnt what every game/game developer in the history of gaming thinks but anyone has the right to have its own opinion... thats correct. Also its not just sometimes but it wont matter anyway.

And i wont accept you to say we're both reapeating ourselves... just you didnt come up with new arguments. Defend your point but be consistent.

For last... i dunno if you meant that on the other post saying "leaving with head high or low"... but i hope you realize this is not about winning an argument or defending honor and pride. Its about making whats the best for the game besides your selfish desires... i'm not worried about these things... i'm human and i can be wrong... there was just not consistent argument to fight the huge flaws i pointed out.

I'm sure we are a smart enough community to come up with a better system than this one or the previous one. Hope this settles it.

 

what

 

Every game in history is developed so a higher lvl beats the crap of a lower one... you think thats hurtfull. Thats your point.

 

? How do we know this? We don't even know where kChamp stands. For all we know, he is secretly devising a new weapon system right now (unlikely, but you never can tell...). I think this would end up being 50/50. I mean, higher levels do get better weapons and more experience. I'm still against the system, but you do have to realize that high levels still are enabled to win almost any match. Ahole won three without contest with full luck; maybe that will happen if anyone gets full luck. We dunno.

 

Ecxatly... no other game has a 50/50 chance on a lower lvl playing a higher one... just being close to that is already hurtfull for the gameplay.

If Kyle really wants to take out the lvl advantage and make everyone equal... why not give all weapons to everyone (except bought ones from store) at same strengh and make the lvls reawards to be only maps and tank parts or something else useless? This way he could reinvent the entire system brought out by lvling type of games and create something new... making lvling just as a fashion thing to do.

Or he could go even further and just eliminate the lvls... make a different system like achievments to get maps and other appearence itens.

 

I feel like if its possible for a lvl 20 to beat a lvl 80, then there would be no point in leveling in the first place. Not saying its impossible now, but that low level guy must be extremely good at SSL or the high level is just messing around.


I feel like to consider the game balanced a person should be able to beat someone 20 lvls above being a bit of a challenge, and to beat someone 20 lvls below with some difficulty.

With the 40-60 lvl gap mentioned, that would be like a lvl 1 being able to beat a lvl 40 which sounds really ridiculous.

In my perspective when playing with higher levels under the old system (I need to play more with the new one to give an accurate response) although I rarely won against them, I still was able to give them a run for their game.

In the end I wasn't playing expecting to win, but to see how well I could go against a higher level and as long as I wasn't dead after 5 turns I was pretty fine with that.

 

Here's a list of games from the top of my head where players gain no discernible advantage other than skill the more they play, staying as powerful as they were the first time they started the game:

Counter Strike*
Team Fortress*
Quake*
Chess*
Mario Kart*
Super Smash Brothers*
Most sports*
Most MOBAs*
Most fighting games*
Chivalry*
Wii Sports*
Most Mario games
Super Meat Boy
I Wanna Be The Guy
Spelunky
Nuclear Throne
Hotline Miami
The Binding of Isaac
The entire speedrunning community
Tetris
Portal
Most puzzle games
Most arcade games

*Is also competitive multiplayer

 

i play competitive counterstrike with my team

the game is extremely skill and team-based. there is no advantage when you rank up except going versus higher ranks. its the 2nd most played game on steam. just because someone is higher level or ranked, doesn't mean they /should/ always defeat a lower level one because of preset advantages.

it is purely by skill and teamwork
it is possible for a lower level to kill a high level. there is no problem with that if it is skill based.

you dont know what youre talking about because this is probably like the only thing you play, and youre trying to create a a false premise

 

Which of these games have a lvl system? Most fps dont have... still we already stipulated that a new player will be overcomed by a higher one even in FPS. Super meat boy... really dude? Dont fill this list with useless examples. Its not even a MMO game.

Its not a false premise... any lvling type of game have the lvl advantage... its the entire concept of lvling in a game in the first place. You guys are just trying to go agaisnt blindly cause you know it... any person with eyes to see and games experience know this is how it works.

So or you guys want games where the lvl means nothing more than a fashion thing instead of giving you new weapons and power... or you guys want a role new system where theres NO lvl system... both quoted in some games there. Which is what i mentioned on my previous post... so basically you guys dont want to play SSL... or want change SSL's type of game.

Honestly i dont even know why to reply anymore... after these post its clear you are more concerned trying to attack me personally than improve the game itself... denying something so obvious just for stturborn reasons? I mean... commom guys... we're adults.

I dont even know how to react. I'm just wondering why someone would post a list knowing its useless and it doesnt fit the example needed... just weird.

 

Just got to this thread, bout to leave cuz of this. Have no clue what is going on;

Games that have competitive PVP and have levels that affect the game:

Destiny
Dead Space 2
Pokemon
SPIRAL KNIGHTS (MMO)
(off the top of my head)

 

I listed those games to disclaim your bogus statement that "your opinion just go agaisnt what every game/game developer in the history of gaming thinks". So that's what I did, I listed games of all categories that had no advantages between players other than skill. If you think SSL shouldn't follow that model, so be it, but don't blanket that mentality with literally "every game in the history of gaming".

 

you and towel are...

 

But they are not contradicting what i said... all the games i know in the list are not lvl based o.o you just dug your own grave there. So i realized i dont even need to reply anymore cause you confirmed the "bogus" statement yourself

Hope the discussion help the readers.

 

Jesus Christ. It's like we're speaking two entirely different languages.

I'll just say what I believe from the start and I'll be done as well.

-People should play the game because it's fun, not because they want XP
-There is nothing wrong with there being a chance for an underdog moment
-SSL will always be a small game relative to most other multiplayer Steam games

I'm not saying the current system is perfect, I'm just saying its better than what we had before. Dare I say, it made the game too easy.

 

No... its like you're trying to defend your point with unconsistent argument.

Despite your already misproven points i wont repeat myself... so moving on you are saying the new system is not perfect and it really isnt even close to that... what i want is a better system... and you should too... if you really love to play this game. So contribute for better ideas instead of settling for this one. Simple as that.

 

Ok, here's my suggestion to improve the current system:
http://www.shellshockliveforums.com/threads/picks-bans.11138/

 

Great! Than my job here is done... hope it helps everyone. I'll read your sugestion later and give my thoughts about it... prob on private message