For those of who coming in with one liners, do keep your comments out. This is a discussion.
If you think this makes the game boring, explain why you think so. If you think this kills diversity, explain why.
@ Twisp
Do read before you comment. I've said I'm not sure if codes should be standardized or left alone. One way kills them, the other makes them even more valuable.
I really would like to hear your explanations on how it makes the game more boring and how it kills diversity. This in fact adds more options for every faction, thus it increases diversity. Which is contrary to what many of you have said.
As for it not making sense, do tell exactly how people wouldn't acquire their enemies weapons and use them to improve their own? We do that know in the real work, we steal technology from other nations, or purchase it and improve upon our own.
I'm not seeking to remove the bonus/less damage that weaponry does depending on the shield it is being used against, that is to be left alone as it adds flavor and some tactical thinking.
I'll ask again, if you aren't going to explain your thoughts don't post. If you think it will be boring, explain why. There are other Freelancer mods that use this type of set up that are more successful and have more intense PvP furballs than Disco has. This wasn't my idea, it was made by the person in charge of balancing, by a developer. It could make balancing easier, could make rules regarding technology relaxed, remove a ton of the SRP requests regarding weapons. All of which benefit the community in the end in some way.
Am I saying it is the right thing to do? No. I'm not sure myself, hence the request to discuss it.
The main issue people have with it is that it destroys the diversity of loadouts we currently have.
How does it destroy the diversity we have now? It allows for more diversity. I'm honestly not understanding how it destroys it. Not trying to say 100% it doesn't, it might. I just don't see how.
It starts with weapons... then goes on to ships. If such a thing is implemented then ships will definantly have to be re balanced according to what they face, armour equalised, weapon hard-points, agility.... you see where this is going. Everyone ends up flying the same ship with the same guns even though they look different. It may be "fair" but most people won't like it.
And no, it doesn't make sense. Rival countries look for advantages over their enemies, not ways to make their capabilities equal. They steel each-others stuff to analyse it and either devise a counter or make something that's better in several ways. When opposing forces have the same stuff it causes a stalemate and no-one gets anywhere until someone tries something new (WW1's a good example of this)
Disco is already balanced enough as it is without making everything the same. If there are unbalanced weapons or ships just tweek them a little or give the main opposition something the other doesn't have, there is no need equalise everything.
' Wrote:How does it destroy the diversity we have now? It allows for more diversity. I'm honestly not understanding how it destroys it. Not trying to say 100% it doesn't, it might. I just don't see how.
Diversity is defined on dictionary.reference.com as
Dictionary Wrote:–noun, plural -ties.
1.
the state or fact of being diverse; difference; unlikeness.
2.
variety; multiformity.
3.
a point of difference.
If every gun, regardless of faction, has the same stats, so that a 4.0 IMG Vamp is equivalent to a 4.0 Lane Hacker Hellflurry, just for the sake of comparison, what that means is that they are the same gun with a reskin and a different effect. (I understand you also intend to have the various guns replicated to equal-stat versions with different refire rates, so that there will also be a 2.0 Vamp and a 2.0 Hellflurry, so to speak)
This means that, in the context of the Freelancer universe, you'll be given the choice of Gun A, with a 2.0 refire rate, Gun B, with a 4.0 refire rate, etc., and you get the choice of what color the gun is. In other words, difference is removed, because every gun will be the same. There will be no unlikeness that isn't either the difference between Gun A and Gun B, or a different color pattern.
In other words, you'd have Vampire Fast, Vampire Slower, Vampire Slow and Vampire Slowest, because a gun's identity is in how it works, its efficacy, its character, not just in the color of its projectile effects.
What this means is, in making all guns have the same stats, while it would reduce the tendency for peeveepee-horses to collect the best guns, it would reduce the diversity of guns considerably, because the diversity of guns would be limited to my Vampire Fast Blue versus your Vampire Slow Red, so to speak. They different colors, all still Vampires, with equivalent stats, equivalent DPS, equivalent everything, and that's not diversity.
Note: I know that Vampires will not be a benchmark, but you could replace every instance of Vampire in that post with Magma Hammers or Furies and the argument would hold true. Diversity is about more than just color and name, it's about the character and identity of the gun; some guns should be better, some should be worse, some should be more efficient, some should sacrifice efficiency for punch. It's their stats, not their color, not their names, that really make them different, and when you make their stats the same, then there is no difference between them, and that directly contradicts what diversity is.
TL:DR, standardizing all weaponry so that they're all essentially the same kills diversity.
"Things will not calm down, Daniel Jackson. They will, in fact, calm up."
' Wrote:It starts with weapons... then goes on to ships. If such a thing is implemented then ships will definantly have to be re balanced according to what they face, armour equalised, weapon hard-points, agility.... you see where this is going. Everyone ends up flying the same ship with the same guns even though they look different. It may be "fair" but most people won't like it.
And no, it doesn't make sense. Rival countries look for advantages over their enemies, not ways to make their capabilities equal. They steel each-others stuff to analyse it and either devise a counter or make something that's better in several ways. When opposing forces have the same stuff it causes a stalemate and no-one gets anywhere until someone tries something new (WW1's a good example of this)
Disco is already balanced enough as it is without making everything the same. If there are unbalanced weapons or ships just tweek them a little or give the main opposition something the other doesn't have, there is no need equalise everything.
I'm pretty sure I said that the ships would need to be adjusted. Who says they have to be equalized? I don't see how you think they are flying the same ship and using the same guns. Oh, wait. You think that for something to be different it needs to be better or worse than something else right?
I never said they tried to make their technology equal to their opponents. I said they use their opponents technology to improve upon their own. Why is there no need? Because you like things the way they are? Tad selfish si?
I'm not saying there is a need. I'm saying it is an option, an option that a developer presented before. If the developer didn't feel there was any merit in the idea he wouldn't have mentioned it.
There wasn't a need to make the change to cap ship weapons that was made, but it was made. You see my point? As you said, no one gets anywhere until someone tries something new.
' Wrote:Diversity is defined on dictionary.reference.com as
If every gun, regardless of faction, has the same stats, so that a 4.0 IMG Vamp is equivalent to a 4.0 Lane Hacker Hellflurry, just for the sake of comparison, what that means is that they are the same gun with a reskin and a different effect. (I understand you also intend to have the various guns replicated to equal-stat versions with different refire rates, so that there will also be a 2.0 Vamp and a 2.0 Hellflurry, so to speak)
This means that, in the context of the Freelancer universe, you'll be given the choice of Gun A, with a 2.0 refire rate, Gun B, with a 4.0 refire rate, etc., and you get the choice of what color the gun is. In other words, difference is removed, because every gun will be the same. There will be no unlikeness that isn't either the difference between Gun A and Gun B, or a different color pattern.
In other words, you'd have Vampire Fast, Vampire Slower, Vampire Slow and Vampire Slowest, because a gun's identity is in how it works, its efficacy, its character, not just in the color of its projectile effects.
What this means is, in making all guns have the same stats, while it would reduce the tendency for peeveepee-horses to collect the best guns, it would reduce the diversity of guns considerably, because the diversity of guns would be limited to my Vampire Fast Blue versus your Vampire Slow Red, so to speak. They different colors, all still Vampires, with equivalent stats, equivalent DPS, equivalent everything, and that's not diversity.
Note: I know that Vampires will not be a benchmark, but you could replace every instance of Vampire in that post with Magma Hammers or Furies and the argument would hold true. Diversity is about more than just color and name, it's about the character and identity of the gun; some guns should be better, some should be worse, some should be more efficient, some should sacrifice efficiency for punch. It's their stats, not their color, not their names, that really make them different, and when you make their stats the same, then there is no difference between them, and that directly contradicts what diversity is.
TL:DR, standardizing all weaponry so that they're all essentially the same kills diversity.
Do explain how a weapon has character for me. I'd like to hear that.
Currently most factions are limited to one or two weapons already. Some of which are quite useless when compared to others. By standardizing them, you open up more options. The weapons are different, they have different DPS, different maleficent, different refire rate. Only thing that is the same is effect and maybe name.
Right now my diversity is limited to My Vampire. My suggestions means it becomes My Vampire 1 or My Vampire 2. Two different weapons who are indeed different, but share a name and an effect.
I'm not saying bring every weapons DPS up to 2000. I'm saying bring the sub par weapons up to the field and then give us more options than we already have. I'm suggestion a more diverse offering of weapons, not the opposite.
That way, instead of having to seek out another factions weapons for the one you want or one that actually is worth a damn. You can turn to your own faction's weapons.
When a university admissions officer says "we look for diversity in applicants," what they mean is they look to create a graduating class comprising students with various strengths and weaknesses. They don't want 2000 students that are all 1/4 Asian, 1/4 Black, 1/8 Northern European, 1/8 Mediterranean, and 1/4 Persian in ethnic background with equal SAT or IB scores.
![[Image: 50px-OSILogo.png]](http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d37/dannflyheit/Faction%20Icons/50px-OSILogo.png)
