Jump to content

Edit History

Please note that revisions older than 365 days are pruned and will no longer show here
meganoth

meganoth

6 hours ago, Lyote said:


So its not a problem that an attribute tree can best be described as:

  • Play something else until lategame, then respec
  • Put your points into another attribute because the attributes own weapons suck

You dont see how that is an issue?
All the other attributes are really good in the early game. INT is the only one that has these handicaps for no good reason. They should all be equally viable in the early game. 
Especially since the main difference between the attributes is playstyle, not raw power. 
 

 

I have seen the same mechanic (specific classes are good for beginners, some classes are more difficult) in many games, some limit you to the beginner class for the first game, some just mention it in the class description. This is quite normal, just that it is communicated better elsewhere, something we can surely blame TFP for.

 

I have played all classes and I have never had a special problem with INT, i.e. that I was dying more when using INT. I would say the difference between INT and other classes for an experienced player is almost negligible, though I am not in a position to really measure that with certainty as I haven't played INT in single player in the last 2 alphas, only in co-op. A bit of knowledge how to play that class may be necessary, but that is as it should be for a replayable game that you should not know everything after playing for a few hours.

 

Me I am very very glad this class exists, just like AGI with stealth. These are the two classes where at least combat and maybe strategy as well is or can be very different than the other classes, whereas STR, FOR and PER to a lesser degree feel very samey when you have played them multiple times.

 

Note: We are at day 4 of our current co-op game, everyone still has a quality1 pipe rifle and a q1 or 2 melee weapon. And the melee weapon is by far the most important weapon in our arsenal, the damage output of pipe rifles alone is not enough to help you in oh-@%$# situations anyway. Nobody of us has more than 1 point in any ranged weapon, if at all, and with the quality of the pipe weapons it would be a waste of points (the only reason for the one point is magazine find chance really). [EDIT] Two of us already died because they were relying on their pipe rifles to save them by the way.

 

So I would guess it takes at least another week before the INT player might feel any handicap in his ranged arsenal because his pipe rifle is lacking in damage. But I would guess by that time he already might have a pusher turret, and for survivability I would say a well placed pusher turret is at least as good as the 10 or 15% better ranged damage someone else would have with his gun. Especially the poor PER player with his single-shot rifle 😉

 

 

 

 

 

meganoth

meganoth

5 hours ago, Lyote said:


So its not a problem that an attribute tree can best be described as:

  • Play something else until lategame, then respec
  • Put your points into another attribute because the attributes own weapons suck

You dont see how that is an issue?
All the other attributes are really good in the early game. INT is the only one that has these handicaps for no good reason. They should all be equally viable in the early game. 
Especially since the main difference between the attributes is playstyle, not raw power. 
 

 

I have seen the same mechanic (specific classes are good for beginners, some classes are more difficult) in many games, some limit you to the beginner class for the first game, some just mention it in the class description. This is quite normal, just that it is communicated better elsewhere, something we can surely blame TFP for.

 

I have played all classes and I have never had a special problem with INT, i.e. that I was dying more when using INT. I would say the difference between INT and other classes for an experienced player is almost negligible, though I am not in a position to really measure that with certainty as I haven't played INT in single player in the last 2 alphas, only in co-op. A bit of knowledge how to play that class may be necessary, but that is as it should be for a replayable game that you should not know everything after playing for a few hours.

 

Me I am very very glad this class exists, just like AGI with stealth. These are the two classes where at least combat and maybe strategy as well is or can be very different than the other classes, whereas STR, FOR and PER to a lesser degree feel very samey when you have played them multiple times.

 

Note: We are at day 4 of our current co-op game, everyone still has a quality1 pipe rifle and a q1 or 2 melee weapon. And the melee weapon is by far the most important weapon in our arsenal, the damage output of pipe rifles alone is not enough to help you in oh-@%$# situations anyway. Nobody of us has more than 1 point in any ranged weapon, if at all, and with the quality of the pipe weapons it would be a waste of points (the only reason for the one point is magazine find chance really). One of us already died because he was relying on his pipe rifle to save him by the way.

 

So I would guess it takes at least another week or more before the INT player might feel any handicap in his ranged arsenal because his pipe rifle is lacking in damage. But I would guess by that time he already might have a pusher turret, and for survivability I would say a well placed pusher turret is at least as good as the 10 or 15% better ranged damage someone else would have with his gun. Especially the poor PER player with his single-shot rifle 😉

 

 

 

 

 

meganoth

meganoth

5 hours ago, Lyote said:


So its not a problem that an attribute tree can best be described as:

  • Play something else until lategame, then respec
  • Put your points into another attribute because the attributes own weapons suck

You dont see how that is an issue?
All the other attributes are really good in the early game. INT is the only one that has these handicaps for no good reason. They should all be equally viable in the early game. 
Especially since the main difference between the attributes is playstyle, not raw power. 
 

 

I have seen the same mechanic (specific classes are good for beginners, some classes are more difficult) in many games, some limit you to the beginner class for the first game, some just mention it in the class description. This is quite normal, just that it is communicated better elsewhere, something we can surely blame TFP for.

 

I have played all classes and I have never had a special problem with INT, i.e. that I was dying more when using INT. I would say the difference between INT and other classes for an experienced player is almost negligible, though I am not in a position to really measure that with certainty as I haven't played INT in single player in the last 2 alphas, only in co-op. A bit of knowledge how to play that class may be necessary, but that is as it should be for a replayable game that you should not know everything after playing for a few hours.

 

Me I am very very glad this class exists, just like AGI with stealth. These are the two classes where at least combat and maybe strategy as well is or can be very different than the other classes, whereas STR, FOR and PER to a lesser degree feel very samey when you have played them multiple times.

 

 

 

 

 

×
×
  • Create New...