Jump to content

revolutionary

Member
  • Content count

    161
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

116 Excellent

About revolutionary

  • Rank
    Potato Aim

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. revolutionary

    Why They Keep Failing Balance

    what exactly is your point? obv when comparing SMGs and ARs for close quarter combat you do not look at single shot damage but time to kill, where again, a UMP has shorter time to kill than an AK against chest shots of someone wearing a lvl2 vest for example.
  2. revolutionary

    Why They Keep Failing Balance

    dude you just keep sprouting nonsense. snipers obv should not beat ARs at close range. they are in a completely different category of weapon. but SMGs and ARs both are close range weapons. when soldiers raid a house they use ARs not SMGs. that's the real life argument which should not really count, it just shows that ARs are close range weapon as well as medium range. in game, because they have the advantage of being close as well as medium range weapons they are rarer than SMGs. again, can you actually come up with an argument why the more common SMGs, that have less recoil without attachments than ARs have with attachments should actually be able to compete with ARs close range, damage wise? for christs sake, take a moment, concentrate, and actually try to come up with a single argument. and no, "i want it easy so i want easy recoil weapons to do a lot of damage" is not a valid argument. SMGs should have advantages in close range, but it should not be damage.
  3. revolutionary

    Why They Keep Failing Balance

    just cause ARs beat SMGs on long range does not mean SMGs should beat ARs on close range in damage. i suggested methods to buff SMGs that would make them more viable without touching their damage. the fact that you call cs an 'easy' game and at the same time defend weapons with less recoil being comparable damage wise to weapons with higher recoil is just laughable.
  4. revolutionary

    Why They Keep Failing Balance

    i said SMGs ARE more common than DMRs, which is a fact. SMGs have less recoil than ARs, another fact. SMGs actually have less recoil without attachments than ARs have with attachments. and a UMP kills someone in a lvl2 vest faster than a scar does. which makes no sense at all from a balancing standpoint. the fact you do not understand this is really mind-boggling, tbh. we don't even have to start talking about the vector. so again, none of what you said makes any sense really.
  5. revolutionary

    Why They Keep Failing Balance

    i made a similar post while test server was up. i am not salty that they do not redo everything according to my model. i am salty mostly because they actually ask for feedback but when you give it you get no feedback on your feedback. i think i made some valid points and i argued them instead of the usual "I WANT THIS OR THAT BECAUSE I WANT IT" shit you get to read here. so i do kinda expect them to at least tell me that they are reading feedback. is made 2 very basic points about balance and derived conclusions of how their balance patch failed. how about you start by telling me where my logic is flawed?
  6. revolutionary

    Why They Keep Failing Balance

    am i wasting my time here or are devs reading this forum?
  7. there are two pretty simple concepts that BH seem to completely ignore when it comes to weapon balance. 1) the easier it is to play a certain weapon, the weaker it has to be. lets use csgo as an example: the AK has more recoil, therefore it is slightly stronger than the M4 (out of context: another reason is that this slightly reduces how inherently CT sided maps are). the most obvious example for how BH seem to ignore this concepts is how OP the m4 was. it had more dps than the scar while at the same time having less recoil. even without a tac stock. this simply does not make sense from a balancing standpoint. the scar is still worse than the m4, even after the latest patch. the only thing it has going for it is very slightly less damage falloff on range, which almost never makes any difference in hits needed for a kill. they also nerfed the scar because now aim punch is based on damage when before the scar inflicted higher aim punch. non of this makes any sense. 2) the easier it is to acquire a specific weapon, the weaker it has to be. another csgo example: a SMG costs less than an AR, therefore it is weaker. the following will show how their latest balance patch completely fails to recognize aforementioned basic balancing guidelines. implications of the patch for SMG vs AR: the recent SMG dmg buff and AR damage nerf shows that they do not understand those 2 concepts. i have not read a single sensible argument and can not think of one why SMGs should be comparable in damage to ARs. SMGs are more common, so is their ammo. they have way less recoil and are easier to play. there is simply no reason why they should have comparable DPS and TTK to ARs. it makes no sense from a balancing standpoint. SMGs should have their place for QCQ. but to achieve that, as explained, buffing their damage is the wrong approach. what they should have done to make them more viable in QCQ is: less recoil and spread while moving without ADSing for SMGs. faster ADS speed, faster movement speed and so on. this would make them viable for pushing buildings, together with the fact that doors and other obstacles are way less of a problem for SMGs because their barrel is shorter and does not as easily start pointing up when close to an object. implications of the patch for DMR vs AR: there is nothing wrong with ARs being the bread and butter in this game. they are the middle ground between the easy to obtain and easy to control SMGs and the rarer DMRs and snipers. every player can be expected to obtain an AR within a reasonable loot time, which is not necessarily true for DMRs and snipers. nerfing ARs increases RNG because you will be more reliant on finding a DMR. this might not matter in normal games where half the server hot drops and dies within the first 5 minutes, but it has major implications for competitive play, where teams that find more DMRs/snipers will now have quite a big advantage because of the current state of ARs. the recoil nerf to ARs was imo intended to indirectly buff DMRs and give them a place in the game. the reason nobody played the mini and SKS was that their recoil was comparably insane. and what they now did was increase DMR recoil and lower recoil recovery. you still have to shoot painfully slow and recoil is still high for DMRs. nobody liked their high recoil, so what they thought would fix this issue was to also increase AR recoil. which is a terrible choice, imo. high recoil makes the game more random. horizontal recoil can not be predicted at all and only reacted to. furthermore the 'kick' of the recoil now seems more random and while spraying you will get sudden vertical kicks. all this does is make RNG a bigger factor in the outcome of fights. what they should have done: - balance the m4 with other ARs. low recoil needs to come with low dps and high recoil needs to come with high dps. while keeping overall AR performance where it was. buff SMGs for close combat in the aforementioned ways (less recoil and spread while moving without ADSing for SMGs. faster ADS speed, faster movement speed and so on) instead of buffing their damage. buff DMR recoil recovery (as they did) without increasing their recoil. this way, SMGs would fill a role, albeit a small one. which is no issue since they are the most common weapons, as is their ammo, and they are the easiest to play. they should not be on par with ARs. ARs would be the jack of all trades, which they should be, since while rarer than SMGs, you can be expected to find one in a competitive setting. DMRs would get buffed and would out-perform ARs on longer ranges, without hurting ARs too much and without making them a requirement to be on even grounds with someone who had better RNG loot. the recoil increase on ARs and DMRs would be reverted, resulting in RNG recoil having less impact in the outcome of fights.
  8. revolutionary

    It's Long Past Time For A Practice Mode/Map

    i wonder what is stopping them from adding a shooting range.
  9. revolutionary

    Detailed Balance Patch Feedback

    push.
  10. revolutionary

    Detailed Balance Patch Feedback

    oh and one more thing: if i point my crosshair at something (hipfire) and then ADS, the center of my retdot/holo does point somewhere to the left/right of where i was previously aiming. this should get fixed already, especially now that the first shot delay was removed.
  11. - smgs should not be able to compete with ARs in terms of dps. they should be viable in CQQ, but to achieve this, they should be given other advantages, not dps : ADS speed, less affected by obstacles that make your weapon point up because of the smaller barrel, movement speed, less spread/inaccuracy when not ADSing compared to ARs, less spread/inaccuracy while moving. any/all of that could be buffed, making them a viable close range option (which they already were), esp in towns and houses. but buffing dps is a bad thing. the vector, despite all the newbs who claim it is useless, can already (pre-patch) compete with ARs in terms of damage output. it kills someone in a lvl2 vest faster than any non crate AR. after the buff (and the nerf to 556 damage) it is even more insane. this makes no sense. again, you can make SMGs viable at close range by buffing them in the aforementioned ways, without touching their dps. never ever should a SMG have more dps than any AR, let alone all of them. it's just silly. - AR changes: an example of why we either need a practice map (we need that anyways) for extensive testing to provide feedback, or more detailed patch notes. was the recoil on all 556 rifles increased by the same value or percentage? this would mean that the scar is still terribly under-powered compared to the others. the fact that all non-crate 556 ARs got seemingly nerfed in the same way is bad and does not achieve the goal of personal choice that you announced earlier. overall i am concerned that ARs got nerfed too heavily. it is really really hard to test (lack of practice map) to come to a reasonable conclusion and provide decent feedback. overall, i think the 556 ARs were in a good spot pre-patch, besides the m4 which was simply OP and needed a nerf. this game uses unpredictable recoil, there is no pattern to follow, you can only react to it. with such a system, there comes a point where too much recoil simply makes the game too RNG. sometimes you get a nice and easy recoil pattern, sometimes it is just all over the place. it is neither fun to play nor fun to watch esports when a big factor that determines the outcome of a fight is high, random recoil. the main goal for the nerf might be to make DMRs more viable. there are issues with this approach though. first of all it is a bad design choice to balance the game around the rarer type of weapons. it unnecessarily increases RNG. 2nd of all, instead of nerfing ARs, DMRs should have recieved a slightly bigger buff. as an example: when the mini got nerfed a while back after many complained that it was too strong, it got nerfed too much. and now, to bring it in line with the ARs, ARs get nerfed? instead of doing that, buffing the DMRs slightly more would have been the wiser choice. people did not like DMRs because their recoil was simply too high. increasing AR recoil might achieve some kind of balance but at the cost that now ARs also have high recoil. again, balancing the game around a rare (RNG), unliked (because of high recoil) type of weapon (DMRs) is a bad choice. ARs should be the main weapon type to balance the game around. they are the middle ground between the common SMGs and the rare DMRs/sniper rifles. as such, they are the most versatile, as they well should be. SMGs and their ammo are too common, they should have their use in CQC, not more. DMRs/snipers are rare, they should have their use in long range fights. but ARs are the bread and butter of this game. increasing their recoil simply puts players at the mercy of RNG. - tldr regarding weapon balance: smgs should not be able to compete with ARs in terms of damage. if you think they need a buff, buff other things, like movement speed or recoil while not ADSing. in order to balance DMRs and ARs, you chose to buff DMRs slightly and nerf AR recoil. too much random unpredictable recoil makes the game too RNG and less fun. DMRs should be buffed slightly more and the nerf to AR recoil should be reconsidered. the fact that people did not like DMRs because of their high recoil does not mean ARs should also have high recoil. the mini and SKS btw still have too much recoil. too much unpredictable recoil makes the game less fun and too RNG. - 762 ammo takes too much capacity. especially considering how HE nades now take up more room. this is terrible for the AK. - new attachments: overall, this patch is meant to provide players with viable choices. "which gun to use should be based on personal preference and its effectiveness in any given situation, rather than simply "which gun is strongest."" which is great, i used almost the exact same words for months when making suggestions in this forum and on reddit. the same should obviously apply to attachments. my initial concern is that with all those new attachments, you might theoretically have the option to chose the one you like the most but in reality you will be forced to use the one you find, because there are now so many different ones. may sound strange but i think that's how it is gonna turn out. the thumb grip reduces vertical recoil and increases horizontal recoil. but it INCREASES recoil recovery, which to my understanding basically counteracts the reduced vertical recoil. if you really want us to provide feedback, we either need a practice map for extensive testing, or you need to provide us with more detailed patch notes. what's wrong with telling us how much exactly each stat gets affected by each grip?and then there is the half grip, which reduces vertical and horizontal recoil AND recovery time. how does this fit with the idea to provide players with choices instead of having one grip that is simply better? the light grip makes sense, imo. less recoil recovery makes it good at tapping at longer ranges but its increased overall recoil makes it worse at spraying or tapping really quickly. reasonable trade off.coming back to my earlier point of having so many attachments that you will be stuck with what you find instead of using the one you like: the light grip imo makes a lot of sense on an SKS because most of the time you would want for recoil to have recovered while shooting. but with all the other grips, will you really have a choice to use it, or will you simply have to use the one you find? the SKS is already a weapon that relies heavily on finding the right attachments. the fact that you can use AR comps on it now is great, but when it comes to grips i fear that most of them are actually really bad for an SKS and it will come down to RNG if you find one that makes the SKS actually usable. i think getting rid of one ofthe grips altogether and maybe re-balancing the others would be a good thing. - new scopes: we are not provided with sensitivity sliders in the options for the new scopes. this is terrible. people use different methods to convert their sensitivities from one FOV (scope) to another. how will sensitivity work for the new scopes? will it be automatically converted by the default 100% monitor match that you seem to use (a sensitivity of 50 for both ADS and the 4x is to my understanding a 100% mm conversion). what about players that want a different conversion method? we need sensitivity sliders for the new scopes. the 3x scope looks really bad imo, and is confusing. - reload time increase on ARs: i don't quite understand how this was necessary. smgs were already faster than ARs. all this really does is decrease the chances of someone making a big play 1v4 or 1v3 which is a bad thing because those plays are the ones that provide a lot of excitement both when playing and when watching esports. it is an indirect buff to the quickdraw, but also makes players more dependent on finding the right mag, especially because at the same time it is buffing the extended-quickdraw immensely. unneeded change. this is a big patch and it will have a big impact. please take your time with it and reconsider the way you want to balance the different weapons.
  12. revolutionary

    It's Long Past Time For A Practice Mode/Map

    there is absolutely no way DM is the best practice method in cs. it is more of a warmup tool. if we both had a newb friend who wanted to reach global from ~gold nova and you told your newb to go dm and i told my newb to use a practice map, there is NO WAY yours would get to global faster. lets say they were both bad at stutter stepping. sure, if you told him how to do it and told him to practice it in dm, he would eventually get good. my newb would get good at it way faster because he could just enable show_impacts and really learn how to do it. you can get better by dming but practice maps are way more efficient.
  13. revolutionary

    Simple Way to Catch ESP (Aimbots)

    look, op, if you run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. If you run into assholes all day, you're the asshole. you seem completely unwilling to listen to reason but ill try one more time. each rifle has different ballistics. scopes do not automatically adjust to each weapon you put them on. this means the mil dots are not completely accurate and the actual aim points vary from rifle to rifle. you have presented no evidence at all that aiming higher makes your bullet drop sooner and hit lower than when aiming directly at it. because it simply is not the case. regarding the clip you showed of you using the UMP zeroed to 300m at close range: the guy is what, 10m away from you? so even when zeroed to 300m, the bullets only arcs up a little bit in the beginning and still manage to hit him. wtf did you expect to happen? nobody is arguing that the physics in this game are a 1:1 representation of real world physics. but they are close enough. your claims are completely ridiculous. get good at the game or quit. but stop with this bullshit and accept the simple fact that just because you know how to shoot a rifle in RL does not mean that skill translates to a game.
×