What weapons are required in an FPS game?

[Cogburn]

Once and for all, lets see if we can't get a comprehensive list of weapons that are required in an FPS.

I'll start and you fill in any I've left out or fucked up.

Pistols: Generally high damage, low magazine size, high recoil, varying accuracy, low range. Usually a spec-ops or last ditch weapon
Rifles: Single or burst shot, medium magazine size, high accuracy, medium recoil, medium range, medium damage
Shotgun: single or burst shot, medium magazine size, low accuracy, high recoil, low range, damage based on pellets striking target
Sub Machine Guns: High RoF, high recoil, low accuracy, large magazine size, low range, medium damage
Sniper Rifle: Single or burst shot, high recoil, high accuracy if steady, low magazine size, high damage
Bazooka: Low RoF, low magazine size, high damage on direct hit, splash damage, slow projectile, high recoil
Grenade Launcher: Ballistic (arced) trajectory, low RoF, high damage on direct hit, splash damage, slow projectile, low recoil, low magazine size

A place for everything and everything in its place. Each weapon must fulfill a unique roll on the battlefield otherwise its worthless (for example: the Suppressor).

Let's have it.

[Aftiel]

Well I'll crack out Military Small Arms of the 20th Century 7th Edition later but suffice to say if at all possible having multiple types of each weapon class would be awesome. For instance with pistols there are high damage/low mag-size ones (DE 50, 357, etc.) and low-damage machine pistols CZ75 Auto, then you've got say the FN Five-Seven which kicks ass in the range/penetration category but lacks the stopping power of larger caliber weapons neccessitating greater accuracy for a fast takedown (with the bonus that it penetrates armour really well). Basically I'd like to see a fairly decent variety of weapons in each category and if at all possible more ammo types then are seen in PS (9mm in a mini-chaingun? lolz).

[abathur]

That's probably a pretty good general spread, though I think the key is paying attention to effective ranges of the weapons and how they encroach on those of other weapons. It'd be great to have SMGs and assault rifles, but I never pushed for them in PS because due to avatar phasing, a boltdriver was only effective out to about 350m, MA already effective to 100 and useful to 150, people want an assault rifle with more range on it and you end up with an excruciatingly situational weapon.

Above all, before we think "ok, each faction needs to have an SMG" I think we might be better off thinking, "ok, based on their ideals, what type of close-range weapons is this faction going to be using? ahh, so they'll be using silenced pistols and machetes when possible to be quiet at close range, otherwise they'll be using high calibre pistols, shotguns and explosive devices."

The more carefully we determine that, the less we have to worry about the "big difference" between our factions being a 5 rof, a 4 rof and a 3 rof.

Might be more accurately broken down into roles:
Close-ranged combat weapons (knives, pistols, SMGs, shotgunts etc.)
Ranged assault/supression (assault rifles, heavy machineguns, grenade launchers)
Long-ranged assault (sniper rifles)
Anti-Armor (bazookas, mines, remote detonated explosive devices, grenade launchers?)

And then say, "how is (faction) going to fill this gap, this need based on their favored tactics and ultimate ideals?"

[theFatTubist]

You guys forgot an FPS staple: the Big Fuckin' Gun. Every FPS game needs to have a giant super hard to get gun with awesome damage potential and limited usage...


oh, wait....


OS SPAMMAGE!



....but it would be nice if it was something a soldier could carry and was REALLY expensive on certs.

[NasyVealisanoob]

Depends on what kind of fps.

DM type games:
(dont usualy use cof, might have bullet spread on some weapons but it does not expand/contract)

Rocket laucher (made to kill other infatry)
some kind of hit scan, high dammage, med-low rof weapon, with no zoom
minigun
Shotgun-usualy has some kinda alt fire that does a dubble shot or something with more dammage
Sniper rifle, usualy hitscan, has zoom, high dammage, low rof
grenade laucher
sub machinge gun- usualy gimp cus you spawn with it, usualy has a nade laucher alt fire that is pretty good
ball/orb/whatever shooter - shoots orbs or balls of goo or whatever. Usualy does good dammage and fires at a fairly good rate but, allthough they fly straight and dont arc, the orbs/balls have semi slow travle time so leading your target is required.
Some kind of continuous hit scan beam or lighting or whatever gun
Signature unique Mele weapon - usualy can instagib or do extreamly high dammage per hit but only at point blank.
DM games usualy have 1-2 unique weapons that make them different from other DM games.

Squad based tactical shooter:
uses cof and/or high recoil system. no hit scan weapons, all weapons have travle time and built in diviation to some degree

pistols
sub machine guns
assult rifles
shotguns
grenade laucher attachment for assult rifles
belt fead light machine gun
anti vehicle rocket laucher (geared to kill vehicles)
sniper rifles
knife
weapons in these games are usualy similar in functionality to other squad based tactical shooters.

PS is pretty much between a squad based tactical shooter and a death match so if you wanna make a game like PS you have a mix of the above.

[Cl2v2r]

Once and for all, lets see if we can't get a comprehensive list of weapons that are required in an FPS.

I'll start and you fill in any I've left out or fucked up.

Pistols: Generally high damage, low magazine size, high recoil, varying accuracy, low range. Usually a spec-ops or last ditch weapon
Rifles: Single or burst shot, medium magazine size, high accuracy, medium recoil, medium range, medium damage
Shotgun: single or burst shot, medium magazine size, low accuracy, high recoil, low range, damage based on pellets striking target
Sub Machine Guns: High RoF, high recoil, low accuracy, large magazine size, low range, medium damage
Sniper Rifle: Single or burst shot, high recoil, high accuracy if steady, low magazine size, high damage
Bazooka: Low RoF, low magazine size, high damage on direct hit, splash damage, slow projectile, high recoil
Grenade Launcher: Ballistic (arced) trajectory, low RoF, high damage on direct hit, splash damage, slow projectile, low recoil, low magazine size

A place for everything and everything in its place. Each weapon must fulfill a unique roll on the battlefield otherwise its worthless (for example: the Suppressor).

Let's have it.


I see a problem trying to incorporate too many weapons per range catergory. Eg, the SMG compared to the shotgun or rifle. Would you prefer, at 10m from the target, a sweeper, a cycler, or an AMP? What about 12m?

If faced with too many 'specialized' weapons, people will force the circumstances to suit (surgile JH) or choose the jack-of-all-trades weapon (rifle outdoors and shotgun indoors).

I like ab's version of breakdown by range first.


Maybe before going into great detail on weaponry, should we figure out how it is acquired first? How do you resupply? Certs/skills available and method of obtaining?

Just that if we do all this, then we end up having to change it all because it can't be done because of another part of the system.

[Israelx]

Don't restrict yourself to just militaristic weapons. Think outside the box...try to come up with some truly unique designs that aren't too crazy/enter Ratchet & Clank territory...

[HeliosRed]

One of the things I would like to see incorporated is a few more viable medium ranged weapons, so we can have actual riflemen. And please, for the love of god...no gravity guns.

[Cl2v2r]

If we have for the equivalent of MA, two common pool rifles. One slow firing but accurate and the other rapid fire and innaccurate. It would give a bit more to the medium range fights, I think.

And yes, gravity gun = :-X

[Cogburn]

What I was aiming for was a seperation of weapons based on range as well as RoF and DPS (damage per shot).* That way there can be some preference for different weapons based on a players skill level per situation they can be used in.

So if you have a weapon that dose massive damage in one shot at short range, there should be a weapon that does mediocre damage but throws a lot of projectiles in the same timeframe.* Hell, make the summed DOT (damage over time) the same for both weapons given they are at the same range, but offer them both to vary playstyle.* One isn't really advantageous over the other one except for what you are good at.*

Imagine PlanetSide if the MCG, Lasher and Jackhammer ALL did the same damage in the exact same amount of time.* That means tactics would still be different because of the nature of the projectiles, but you KNOW going in that your weapon is absolutely 100% capable of doing the same DOT to the other guy that he can do to you. Keep in mind that the MCG would require that all projectiles strike the target and for the Jackhammer that all pellets strike the target, but other than that, its even-steven.

Thoughts?

[abathur]

Other than the fact that the lasher has slow projectiles and can't be counted on for the same accuracy rates of the other weapon when aiming at your target... ;)

[Cogburn]

The Lasher is a 100% fucking retarded weapon to place in a "heavy weapons" category in an FPS for just that reason. That's why it took SO long to balance after release AND changing ANY OTHER HA weapon requires a modification to the Lasher for balance.

No other weapon in PlanetSide has been monkied with more than the Lasher and I would NEVER EVER EVER make a weapon like this as a mainstay for infantry.

IMHO any weapon that does AOE damage is in the category with a grenade launcher.

[abathur]

It was cool to have something different than standard fps fare (though I guess you could argue it's somewhat inspired by a plasma gun ala Doom.) but yeah, balance was definitely a huge issue. I still envision some definitely non-standard weapons and such, especially for the technocracy group, but that is something that needs to be reasonably metered with balance. In reality I think part of what needs to take place in the balancing phase is determining that balance, primarily, but then taking the time to determine how changing each weapon effects that balance. When the relationships are established and documented, when tweaks are made you can already have a reasonable understanding of how that might effect overall balance between weapon groupings.

At the end of the day, as long as it can be balanced, I think there's a good case for making things unique and putting in the work to make it come out balanced. People will bitch about balance if it doesn't come, but I don't imagine a word of mouth campaign being based on: "OMG guys, it's soooo balanced!" but rather "OMG guys, they've taken the things normal FPSes do and completely revolutionized them--it's a really unique game that does things its own way."

[Aftiel]

The Lasher is a 100% fucking retarded weapon to place in a "heavy weapons" category in an FPS for just that reason. That's why it took SO long to balance after release AND changing ANY OTHER HA weapon requires a modification to the Lasher for balance.

No other weapon in PlanetSide has been monkied with more than the Lasher and I would NEVER EVER EVER make a weapon like this as a mainstay for infantry.

IMHO any weapon that does AOE damage is in the category with a grenade launcher.


What's funny is I read this after I made my post in the other thread. HAX.

[Cogburn]

Dont get me wrong... The Lasher is a cool weapon for the reasons you stated, I just assert that AOE weapons have no place for mainstay weapons.

Why not give the VS a beam laser like the BFR has? It would have made MUCH more sense in the perspective of other HA.

Which reminds me... For our Technocracy that's exactly what I've been thinking of... Beam lasers. Different sizes, ranges, and damages... Even a Pulse Laser for a SMG/HA variant. Again... just brainstorming. ;)

[Zane]

Once and for all, lets see if we can't get a comprehensive list of weapons that are required in an FPS.

I'll start and you fill in any I've left out or fucked up.

Pistols: Generally high damage, low magazine size, high recoil, varying accuracy, low range. Usually a spec-ops or last ditch weapon
Rifles: Single or burst shot, medium magazine size, high accuracy, medium recoil, medium range, medium damage
Shotgun: single or burst shot, medium magazine size, low accuracy, high recoil, low range, damage based on pellets striking target
Sub Machine Guns: High RoF, high recoil, low accuracy, large magazine size, low range, medium damage
Sniper Rifle: Single or burst shot, high recoil, high accuracy if steady, low magazine size, high damage
Bazooka: Low RoF, low magazine size, high damage on direct hit, splash damage, slow projectile, high recoil
Grenade Launcher: Ballistic (arced) trajectory, low RoF, high damage on direct hit, splash damage, slow projectile, low recoil, low magazine size

A place for everything and everything in its place. Each weapon must fulfill a unique roll on the battlefield otherwise its worthless (for example: the Suppressor).

Let's have it.


And a flamethrower!

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b132/B0b0Th3H0b0/IBURNYOU.jpg

[abathur]

Dont get me wrong... The Lasher is a cool weapon for the reasons you stated, I just assert that AOE weapons have no place for mainstay weapons.

Why not give the VS a beam laser like the BFR has? It would have made MUCH more sense in the perspective of other HA.

Which reminds me... For our Technocracy that's exactly what I've been thinking of... Beam lasers. Different sizes, ranges, and damages... Even a Pulse Laser for a SMG/HA variant. Again... just brainstorming. ;)


I'm somewhat against beam lazers personally. They require consistant and perfect accuracy for ideal DPS. If the dps is balanced around maintaining constant contact, anyone without perfect aim is going to blow monkey. If it's balanced around joe average anyone with godly twitch is going to be neigh unkillable. Weapons like the MCG have a broad "cone" that I can follow the target with rather than a precise lazer (meaning I still maintain a good chance of dealing damage even if I'm not square on rather than 0 damage or all.) With a shotgun, I can fire when I know I've got the aim spot on. With the lasher, well, it's somewhat like a cross between the MCG and a hose. I really actually like the lasher a good bit (though I see where people complain.) I'm just not sure beam weapons are the ideal replacement (not to mention them being an overdone concept, though their use may be unavoidable.)

I'll play with the idea. Give me a chance and I'll see if I can't innovate something (i.e. pull it out of my ass) that doesn't fall into the stereotypical omgadvancedl4z3rzl4wl category yet is still an innovative application of technology in some manner.

[Aftiel]

Instead of continuous go with pulsed, problem solved.

[abathur]

Don't make me eat you. :p

[Aftiel]

I just saved you 3 hours of plotline thought, bitch :P

[abathur]

Nah, I'll still think about it. Just because doing it some other way is a challenge. If I were doing things the easy way I'da gone NC a long time ago! ;)

[Iceonix]

You have to put a difference between "FPS" and "Military FPS"

Standard DM games (Quake, UT, Elite Force) stick with large weapons and fast TTKs. You always have your close-range instagib, your long-range instagib, your standard rifles, and some AoE weapons for variety.

In a military FPS you have an rifle/machine gun, grenades, and a sidearm.

For Cogburnside we should have a little of each. I absolutely love the Rocklet Rifle in PS and I couldn't stand to see some variant of it lost. We should have a more extensive Medium Assault, a much less be-all-end-all HA, pistols/grenades, a grenade launcher, some AV weapons, and some stealth stuff.

[MidPoint]

I want a slingshot.

[abathur]

I want to put it in you.

[Zane]

Dont get me wrong... The Lasher is a cool weapon for the reasons you stated, I just assert that AOE weapons have no place for mainstay weapons.

Why not give the VS a beam laser like the BFR has? It would have made MUCH more sense in the perspective of other HA.

Which reminds me... For our Technocracy that's exactly what I've been thinking of... Beam lasers. Different sizes, ranges, and damages... Even a Pulse Laser for a SMG/HA variant. Again... just brainstorming. ;)


I'm somewhat against beam lazers personally. They require consistant and perfect accuracy for ideal DPS. If the dps is balanced around maintaining constant contact, anyone without perfect aim is going to blow monkey. If it's balanced around joe average anyone with godly twitch is going to be neigh unkillable. Weapons like the MCG have a broad "cone" that I can follow the target with rather than a precise lazer (meaning I still maintain a good chance of dealing damage even if I'm not square on rather than 0 damage or all.) With a shotgun, I can fire when I know I've got the aim spot on. With the lasher, well, it's somewhat like a cross between the MCG and a hose. I really actually like the lasher a good bit (though I see where people complain.) I'm just not sure beam weapons are the ideal replacement (not to mention them being an overdone concept, though their use may be unavoidable.)

I'll play with the idea. Give me a chance and I'll see if I can't innovate something (i.e. pull it out of my ass) that doesn't fall into the stereotypical omgadvancedl4z3rzl4wl category yet is still an innovative application of technology in some manner.


That gives me an idea for the lazer - Keep it as a direct-fire-only lazer, but make different firing modes. First firing mode is small but powerful, takes a lot of skill, less accurate especially up close. Second is a little bit larger but does slighty less damage. If hit by the ssecond firemode's ENTIRE radius, you will take just slightly less damage then a direct hit from mode 1. Then mode 3 is much larger, doing much less damage but more accurate, if hit by all of the beam from that it would do slightly less damage then getting hit by all of 2, which is slightly less then being hit by 1.

Or keep this concept, and instead of making it a non-stop lazer, make it a pulse weapon, and still have innacurate high-damage, medium accuracy and damage, or high accuracy and low damage.

Thoughts?

[Cl2v2r]

Having an area effect for the weapon would probably lead to issues similar to the hitscanning of the shotguns in PS. Although there may be an easy way of coding it that I don't know about.

[Kyraal]

I'm not sure, but is this a beam weapon version of a shotgun you're talking about, Zane?

[Cogburn]

These are not constant beam lasers, although that is possible.

I'm thinking more along the lines of MechWarrior-ish lasers with a slight warmup like the Lancer.

RoF is low, DPS is high. This would basically the Jackhammer of our game. The shorter the distance the particular weapon is designed for, the more damage the laser does. So MA style lasers would do moderate damage, while HA style lasers would do high damage but have low range... and the lowest RoF.

No arguements that this would be the empire tech that would attract the most twitch-killers. A warmup cycle would reduce some of that dramatically. Another skill-item that could be added is overheating, where the weapon must "cool down" after 5-6 shots or it will misfire, but I dont intend for them to be so strong that that would be necessary. I just wanted to throw that out there to make everyone aware that there are quite a few ways to balance a beam laser empire.

[Zane]

I'm not sure, but is this a beam weapon version of a shotgun you're talking about, Zane?


Sort of, but more accurate and long-ranged. If it was a shotgun it would have to be mixed between a longer-ranged machinegun and a... laser thing. :-X Basically just a different look, and if it was a shotgun it would have to have different firing modes, almostl ike a splatterMAX, small medium and large spread firing modes.


These are not constant beam lasers, although that is possible.

I'm thinking more along the lines of MechWarrior-ish lasers with a slight warmup like the Lancer.

RoF is low, DPS is high. This would basically the Jackhammer of our game. The shorter the distance the particular weapon is designed for, the more damage the laser does. So MA style lasers would do moderate damage, while HA style lasers would do high damage but have low range... and the lowest RoF.

No arguements that this would be the empire tech that would attract the most twitch-killers. A warmup cycle would reduce some of that dramatically. Another skill-item that could be added is overheating, where the weapon must "cool down" after 5-6 shots or it will misfire, but I dont intend for them to be so strong that that would be necessary. I just wanted to throw that out there to make everyone aware that there are quite a few ways to balance a beam laser empire.



Agreed, cog, but a warmup would kind of gimp it - that's mostly the reason VS didn't bring in lancers in place of Decis, and imagine if JH, MCG, or Lasher had a warmup time before you could shoot? ANd at that, having a warmup would make them have to have INSANE damage.

Now imagine if, say a Lasher had a warmup but improved damage in PS. You're a VS defending a red alert tech plant, last stand, all of an NC zerg is there. YOu are up top at the air term. YOu start the warmup early, walk outside, and mow down EVERY NC that gets in the way. But on the other hand, you are an NC with a JH that has a warmup.

You go around a corner in a base, in a small battle. A TR rexo with an MCG comes around the corner, kills you before your weapon finishes warming up.

I do however really like the overheating idea, that's how they replaced reloading with Covenant weapons in Halo. Maybe have something where you have to reload but it overheats as well so you can't always be firing. Or maybe, like in halo, you never have to reload but it overheats. In place of reloading, the weapon overheats, but in place of ammo you have nitrogen cartrages (think lasher clip-shaped). When the weapon overheats, you grab one from your invintory (wether it's your backpack, belt, or whatever), hold it up to the weapon, and hear something like letting air out of a bike wheel, or, if you've heard one, fog coming out of a fog machine (the halloween SFX one :-X): the nitrogen cooling off the weapon.

I'm thinking maybe if you let it overheat too much it will SLOWLY start to drain health so you'd have to drop it or cool it off. When you run out of nitrogen, you get to keep going with the weapon until it overheats. But of course this would lead to people exploiting it for unlimited ammo, and just switching weapons for 10-20 seconds while this cools off with no nitrogen.

That's why I'm thinking of maybe even having a permanent source of nitrogen connected to the weapon , with a button on it. I'll see if I can drop up a model of my idea for the clip. Anyways. Same shape/size of a lasher clip, but with a cylinder thingy on top, around 1/10 the size of the actual clip. This would have a small hole always open, that, when you pressed a button (R on the keyboard, a button on the side of the nitrogen tank on the animation/ingame) could retract, making a much bigger hole, then it would release pressure faster.

-=-POSTING MORE ON THIS TOMORROW I'M FALLING ASLEEP AT THE KEYBOARD-=-

[Cogburn]

I'm kinda diggin on this idea...

They dont have reloads, they have bottles of coolant to cool down the weapon faster.* The weapon cannot fire while being cooled, to balance it with a reload.* Time to cool completely would probably be the longest "reload" cycle of any weapon in the same class.* Without using coolant, it takes 3 times as long for heat to dissipate.* Keep the damage and the heat scale so it cannot do an outrageous amount of DoT and remains on par with other empire weapons of the same class.

Furthermore, having the weapon do damage to the user as it overheats past "Critical" is a fantastic way to balance just laying on the trigger, but each empire would have to have something similar. Perhaps ALL empire weapons have some sort of "spam limit" that once it reaches a certain point the weapon begins to backfire injuring the user, overheat and burn the user, or leak some nasty ick on the user and otherwise incapacitate them. It bears some further discussion.

I'm thinking that all HA weapons will have a warmup/cooldown to give that weapon class a particular style of play, so I'd really like to stay away from that for empire specificity.

This is a nice solution and gives the empire a truly unique playstyle.

[abathur]

So can I dive in a pond and shoot from there? :)

[Cogburn]

Since its a laser, and the gun would need to be submerged to be cooled....

Refraction pwns you

[abathur]

Just hotglue a snorkel on the barrel and don't go too deep!

[NasyVealisanoob]

What I was aiming for was a seperation of weapons based on range as well as RoF and DPS (damage per shot). That way there can be some preference for different weapons based on a players skill level per situation they can be used in.

So if you have a weapon that dose massive damage in one shot at short range, there should be a weapon that does mediocre damage but throws a lot of projectiles in the same timeframe. Hell, make the summed DOT (damage over time) the same for both weapons given they are at the same range, but offer them both to vary playstyle. One isn't really advantageous over the other one except for what you are good at.

Imagine PlanetSide if the MCG, Lasher and Jackhammer ALL did the same damage in the exact same amount of time. That means tactics would still be different because of the nature of the projectiles, but you KNOW going in that your weapon is absolutely 100% capable of doing the same DOT to the other guy that he can do to you. Keep in mind that the MCG would require that all projectiles strike the target and for the Jackhammer that all pellets strike the target, but other than that, its even-steven.

Thoughts?



This doesnt work at all. The high dammage per shot weapon will be supperior in time to kill if both weapons put out the same dammage over time.

Example:

Gun A does 50 dammage per shot and shoots 2 shots per second (one shot every .5 seconds) giving it 100 dammage per second

Gun B does 10 dammage per shot and shoots 10 shots per second (one shot every .1 seconds) giving it 100 dammage per second

Both have the same dammage per second. But when gun A fights gun B 1v1, gun A allways wins.


TIME (sec) Gun A dammage Gun A total Gun B dammage Gun B total

.01 50 50 10 10
.11 0 50 10 20
.21 0 50 10 30
.31 0 50 10 40
.41 0 50 10 50
.51 50 100 10 60

(at this point gun A has won the fight since it has delt 100 poits of dammage and gun B is dead)

.61 0 100 10 70
.71 0 100 10 80
.81 0 100 10 90
.91 0 100 10 100

(gun B has finaly caught up with gun A in dammage, its too bad he has been dead for .4 seconds though)

1.01 50 150 10 110

(if the fight were to keep going, gun B would be back to playing catch up with gun A)

You cant ballance on dammage per second alone. TTk plays an equal if not more important role in ballance as well, because if you die first, you lose, reguardless if over the same period of time your weapon would have put out the same dammage.

Basicly the weapon with the higher dammage per shot needs to have a slower dammage over time to ballance out the discrepancy in TTK.

You cant go solely on TTK though since if both guns had equal TTK's they would be equal in a 1v1, but the more powerful gun (gun A) would be severly disadvantaged when dealing with multiple targets or recovering from a miss, where as the gun with a high dot, low dps (gun B) would be able to recover from a missed shot much easyer as well as deal with multiple targets better.

Basicly if they are ballanced on paper, they are not really ballanced. The only way to really tell is to play test and take all the other factors into consideration (accuracy, dammage degredation, ease of use, recoil, etc) However the Ballance point should be with the high dammage weapon having the better TTK and the low dammage weapon haveing the better DOT. You would have to consider everything else and play test it to get it just right though.

[Aftiel]

Good post Nasy, and that's why the MCG really does suck folks. :)

[Cogburn]

Gun A does 50 dammage per shot and shoots 2 shots per second (one shot every .5 seconds) giving it 100 dammage per second

Gun B does 10 dammage per shot and shoots 10 shots per second (one shot every .1 seconds) giving it 100 dammage per second

TIME Gun A Gun A tot Gun B Gun B tot

.01 50 50 10 10
.11 0 50 10 20
.21 0 50 10 30
.31 0 50 10 40
.41 0 50 10 50
.51 50 100 10 60


Your post, while accurate for Planetside, is not accurate of what *I* had asserted :)

EQUAL damage over time means EQUAL, or as close as mathematically possible with whole numbers.


So if you have a weapon that dose massive damage in one shot at short range, there should be a weapon that does mediocre damage but throws a lot of projectiles in the same timeframe.* Hell, make the summed DOT (damage over time) the same for both weapons given they are at the same range, but offer them both to vary playstyle.* One isn't really advantageous over the other one except for what you are good at.*


The following chart is more representative based on what I had said.

TIME* * Gun A* *Gun A tot* * Gun B* * *Gun B tot* *
.01* * * * * *50* * * * * *50* * * * * *17* * * * * *17* * * * *
.11* * * * * *0* * * * * * *50* * * * * *17* * * * * *34* * * * * *
.21* * * * * *0* * * * * * *50* * * * * *17* * * * * *51* * * * * *
.31* * * * * *0* * * * * * *50* * * * * *17* * * * * *68* * * * *
.41* * * * * *0* * * * * * *50* * * * * *17* * * * * *85* * * * * *
.51* * * * * *50* * * * * *100* * * * *17* * * * * *102* * * *

Given we will NOT have health bonuses, both guns kill in .51 seconds... In FACT... Gun B has a distinct advantage over Gun A for partially damaged opponents with health above 50 points.* That is EQUAL DoT.* Your timescale for inclusion of a 2 shot per second weapon should be reduced to 1/2 a second for exactly the reasons that are apparent in the charts.

The problem isnt the chart or the implementation of it, the problem is making sure that all weapons reach thier maximum killing potential (100 hitpoints) in the same amount of time.

[NasyVealisanoob]

Gun A does 50 dammage per shot and shoots 2 shots per second (one shot every .5 seconds) giving it 100 dammage per second

Gun B does 10 dammage per shot and shoots 10 shots per second (one shot every .1 seconds) giving it 100 dammage per second

TIME Gun A Gun A tot Gun B Gun B tot

.01 50 50 10 10
.11 0 50 10 20
.21 0 50 10 30
.31 0 50 10 40
.41 0 50 10 50
.51 50 100 10 60


Your post, while accurate for Planetside, is not accurate of what *I* had asserted :)

EQUAL damage over time means EQUAL, or as close as mathematically possible with whole numbers.


So if you have a weapon that dose massive damage in one shot at short range, there should be a weapon that does mediocre damage but throws a lot of projectiles in the same timeframe. Hell, make the summed DOT (damage over time) the same for both weapons given they are at the same range, but offer them both to vary playstyle. One isn't really advantageous over the other one except for what you are good at.


The following chart is more representative based on what I had said.

TIME Gun A Gun A tot Gun B Gun B tot
.01 50 50 17 17
.11 0 50 17 34
.21 0 50 17 51
.31 0 50 17 68
.41 0 50 17 85
.51 50 100 17 102

Given we will NOT have health bonuses, both guns kill in .51 seconds... In FACT... Gun B has a distinct advantage over Gun A for partially damaged opponents with health above 50 points. That is EQUAL DoT. Your timescale for inclusion of a 2 shot per second weapon should be reduced to 1/2 a second for exactly the reasons that are apparent in the charts.

The problem isnt the chart or the implementation of it, the problem is making sure that all weapons reach thier maximum killing potential (100 hitpoints) in the same amount of time.



Those guns have no where near equal DOT. Only their ttk is the same.

TIME Gun A Gun A tot Gun B Gun B tot
.01 50 50 17 17
.11 0 50 17 34
.21 0 50 17 51
.31 0 50 17 68
.41 0 50 17 85
.51 50 100 17 102

.61 0 100 17 119
.71 0 100 17 136
.81 0 100 17 153
.91 0 100 17 170

(1.0 seconds gun A puts out 100 dammage per second, gun b puts out 170, no where near ballanced)

1.01 50 150 17 187
1.11 0 150 17 204
1.21 0 150 17 221
1.31 0 150 17 238
1.41 0 150 17 255
1.51 50 200 17 272
1.61 0 200 17 289
1.71 0 200 17 306
1.81 0 200 17 323
1.91 0 200 17 340

(2.0 seconds, the imballance between these two weapons become painfuly obvious at 2 seconds, gun A is 140 points behind gun B, 200 vs 340)

2.01 50 250 17 357


Gun A is 50 dammage per .5 seconds = 50/.5 d/s = 100 dammage per second
Gun B is 17 dammage per .1 seconds = 17/.1 d/s = 170 dammage per second

The guns are ballanced in TTK but no where near ballanced in dammage output. Like I said, you cant ballance weapons on paper alone. Gun B has an extream advantage when counting missed shots and multiple target TTK's.

[UGoBoy]

To be fair, that only takes into account straight TTK. It doesn't take into account overall accuracy, warm-up/cool-down times, COF management, overheating, or reloading. A straight DOT comparison doesn't measure up if at second 1.1 you're out of ammo, or your cone of fire is so big that you'll only hit your second target with 1 out of every 3 rounds.

But yeah, what Nasy says is valid. If you're going to say "every weapon in Category X kills in Y amount of time", there will have to be other mitigating factors that make it so that the DOTs are at least nominally equivalent, unless there is supposed to be a distinct advantage that one weapon has over another.

[Cogburn]

(1.0 seconds gun A puts out 100 dammage per second, gun b puts out 170, no where near ballanced)

1.01* * * * * 50* * * * *150* * * * * 17* * * * * 187
1.11* * * * * 0* * * * * *150* * * * * 17* * * * * 204
1.21* * * * * 0* * * * * *150* * * * * 17* * * * * 221
1.31* * * * * 0* * * * * *150* * * * * 17* * * * * 238
1.41* * * * * 0* * * * * *150* * * * * 17* * * * * 255
1.51* * * * * 50* * * * *200* * * * * 17* * * * * 272
1.61* * * * * 0* * * * * *200* * * * * 17* * * * * 289
1.71* * * * * 0* * * * * *200* * * * * 17* * * * * 306
1.81* * * * * 0* * * * * *200* * * * * 17* * * * * 323
1.91* * * * * 0* * * * * *200* * * * * 17* * * * * 340

(2.0 seconds, the imballance between these two weapons become painfuly obvious at 2 seconds, gun A is 140 points behind gun B, 200 vs 340)

2.01 50 250 17 357


Gun A is 50 dammage per .5 seconds = 50/.5 d/s = 100 dammage per second
Gun B is 17 dammage per .1 seconds = 17/.1 d/s = 170 dammage per second

The guns are ballanced in TTK but no where near ballanced in dammage output. Like I said, you cant ballance weapons on paper alone. Gun B has an extream advantage when counting missed shots and multiple target TTK's.


We've discussed elsewhere that wa/co times and "overheating" will balance just such items.

Let's redo the chart with a .4 second OVERHEAT for Gun B every 10 shots:

0.01* * * * * 50* * * * * *50* * * * * 17* * * * * 17
0.11* * * * * 0* * * * * * *50* * * * * 17* * * * * 34
0.21* * * * * 0* * * * * * *50* * * * * 17* * * * * 51
0.31* * * * * 0* * * * * * *50* * * * * 17* * * * * 68
0.41* * * * * 0* * * * * * *50* * * * * 17* * * * * 85
0.51* * * * * 50* * * * *100* * * * * 17* * * * * 102
0.61* * * * * 0* * * * * *100* * * * * 17* * * * * 119
0.71* * * * * 0* * * * * *100* * * * * 17* * * * * 136
0.81* * * * * 0* * * * * *100* * * * * 17* * * * * 153
0.91* * * * * 0* * * * * *100* * * * * 17* * * * * 170
1.01* * * * * 50* * * * *150* * * * * 0* * * * * * OVERHEAT
1.11* * * * * 0* * * * * *150* * * * * 0* * * * * * OVERHEAT
1.21* * * * * 0* * * * * *150* * * * * 0* * * * * * OVERHEAT
1.31* * * * * 0* * * * * *150* * * * * 0* * * * * * OVERHEAT
1.41* * * * * 0* * * * * *150* * * * * 17* * * * * 187
1.51* * * * * 50* * * * *200* * * * * 17* * * * * 204
1.61* * * * * 0* * * * * *200* * * * * 17* * * * * 221
1.71* * * * * 0* * * * * *200* * * * * 17* * * * * 238
1.81* * * * * 0* * * * * *200* * * * * 17* * * * * 255
1.91* * * * * 0* * * * * *200* * * * * 17* * * * * 272
2.01* * * * * 50* * * * *250* * * * * 17* * * * * 289
2.11* * * * * 0* * * * * *250* * * * * 17* * * * * 306
2.21* * * * * 0* * * * * *250* * * * * 17* * * * * 323
2.31* * * * * 0* * * * * *250* * * * * 17* * * * * 340
2.41* * * * * 0* * * * * *250* * * * * 0* * * * * * OVERHEAT
2.51* * * * * 50* * * * *300* * * * * 0* * * * * * OVERHEAT
2.61* * * * * 0* * * * * *300* * * * * 0* * * * * * OVERHEAT
2.71* * * * * 0* * * * * *300* * * * * 0* * * * * * OVERHEAT
2.81* * * * * 0* * * * * *300* * * * * 17* * * * * 357
2.91* * * * * 0* * * * * *300* * * * * 17* * * * * 374
3.01* * * * * 50* * * * *350* * * * * 17* * * * * 391
3.11* * * * * 0* * * * * *350* * * * * 17* * * * * 408
3.21* * * * * 0* * * * * *350* * * * * 17* * * * * 425
3.31* * * * * 0* * * * * *350* * * * * 17* * * * * 442
3.41* * * * * 0* * * * * *350* * * * * 17* * * * * 459
3.51* * * * * 50* * * * *400* * * * * 17* * * * * 476
3.61* * * * * 0* * * * * *400* * * * * 17* * * * * 493
3.71* * * * * 0* * * * * *400* * * * * 0* * * * * * 510
3.81* * * * * 0* * * * * *400* * * * * 0* * * * * * OVERHEAT
3.91* * * * * 0* * * * * *400* * * * * 0* * * * * * OVERHEAT
4.01* * * * * 50* * * * *450* * * * * 0* * * * * * OVERHEAT

Now understand, the timing and damages are purely for the point of discussion; no two weapons would really behave like this.*

TTK remains EXACT, and even with just these sample numbers remains relavtively equal until > 3.01 seconds.* At this point Gun B begins to pull away and outperform Gun A.* This would force Gun A users to put people down fast, but force Gun B users to attempt to stay alive as long as possible to deliver as much damage as possible.* Furthermore, reload times and clip size are not taken into account in this chart.* After 5 seconds of constant firing, both weapons should be empty.* The reload phase gives ANOTHER way to rebalance DoT should it become too askew.* Looking from the way the numbers are progressing in my latest example, Gun B should be due for a reload to give Gun A a chance to catch up, since at 4.01 seconds Gun B out damages Gun A by 110 points.* The chart itself seems to indicate that Gun B requires a 1 second reload time every 4 seconds to allow Gun A a chance to catch up.* This also indicates a clip size of around 30 for Gun B and a clip size of 10 for Gun A.

Further manipulation of the overheating, reload times, and clip size could fine tune these values into something that is within +/- 10 points per second, aggregate.

Does that not address your concerns?

I'm just throwing this into the mix as an example of how additional game dynamics can overcome the inherent imbalance in the DoT concept.* It's not a waste to persue, it's just imcomplete as to how it was implemented in PlanetSide.

[Zane]

Quit having your balance war here. Back to the weapons :)
OP:


Once and for all, lets see if we can't get a comprehensive list of weapons that are required in an FPS.

I'll start and you fill in any I've left out or fucked up.

Pistols: Generally high damage, low magazine size, high recoil, varying accuracy, low range. Usually a spec-ops or last ditch weapon
Rifles: Single or burst shot, medium magazine size, high accuracy, medium recoil, medium range, medium damage
Shotgun: single or burst shot, medium magazine size, low accuracy, high recoil, low range, damage based on pellets striking target
Sub Machine Guns: High RoF, high recoil, low accuracy, large magazine size, low range, medium damage
Sniper Rifle: Single or burst shot, high recoil, high accuracy if steady, low magazine size, high damage
Bazooka: Low RoF, low magazine size, high damage on direct hit, splash damage, slow projectile, high recoil
Grenade Launcher: Ballistic (arced) trajectory, low RoF, high damage on direct hit, splash damage, slow projectile, low recoil, low magazine size

A place for everything and everything in its place. Each weapon must fulfill a unique roll on the battlefield otherwise its worthless (for example: the Suppressor).

Let's have it.


That's OP. Not this:



Yo let's have a forum war over weapon balance!