Guns, too many? Too few?

[DG123]

The strangest thing is probably the people who get confused that other people aren’t completely and utterly into guns. Sometimes people have different interests, dudes.

I don’t see why that’s relevant. You don’t need to be completely and utterly into guns to play a game with lots of guns in it.

The only problem that I’ve noticed is that the NAME of a gun is useless for telling you what it is unless you already know about that weapon in real life.

Easily fixed by putting a couple of letters in the descriptor to designate pistol, rifle, shotgun or whatever.

[Inadequate]

It’s largely because people keep going ‘I like guns! Why don’t you like guns? You should get into liking guns!’ over and over in the thread.

And yes, I think having gun subcategories in advanced inventory would be a big help. Also, like I suggested earlier, army bases and other army-related drops should have probably only a few types of guns and ammo spawning. I know mine only had a few different types that all used the same ammo, because in real life it’s better to have as much ammo compatibility as possible. Gun stores could have a larger selection, but still with more common ammo types. If you really want your obscure/redundant guns like your tommy gun or flintlock rifle or whatnot, have them in out of the way areas like pawn shops or basements or LMOE shelters.

[DG123]

I do quite like the idea of having rarer weapons found in the houses of gun nuts, because indeed, you wouldn’t find those in most gun shops.

I haven’t even found an army base in my current game yet. How rare are they?

[Inadequate]

Well, there are military outposts, which are scattered around, surrounded by turrets from every side, and often with some zombie soldiers. You can usually find military corpses around them, and generally a sleeping area/some display racks of stuff. Then there’s military bunkers, which can be opened with military ID cards, and contain basements chock-full of military grade equipment, from clothes to food to CBMs and inactive turrets/manhacks.

My previous comment was mostly talking about real life, though. No reason for so many types of ammo and so many diverse guns in the military, it’s all about standardization for a reason.

[dwarfkoala]

[quote=“DG123, post:74, topic:4531”]Oh god, what is this I see before me? People actually demanding generic guns?

NO. GET OUT.

That is a horrible idea. This game doesn’t need simplifying. What it needs is to be more intuitive.[/quote]
I don’t see why generic weapons would be so bad, myself. But i’ve never been to a gun store so that might be my ignorance talking. I would like to note, however, that most people do not have such an encyclopediaic knowledge of guns that the cataclysm character seems to have. Abstracting guns to generic versions, i think, would be pretty intuitive and less prone to conflicts. We don’t need to think about balancing gun rarity based on the gun’s rarity in real life, only gameplay value.

Put in more information that helps the player. Would that be possible? Make sure that all weapon descriptions actually reflect what the weapon can do. Make it clear if a weapon is silent or not silent. Better descriptions on the crafting menu etc.

I also recognize that generic guns are a massive change to the game, so if a non-generic system has to remain, I think that the weapon’s descriptions could be changed for the better.

I’d like a system where when you look at a gun’s information screen, it displays
Damage: ||
Dispersion: ||||
Recoil: ||
and so forth, maybe with the actual values in parentheses next to the actual display. That way you can easily get an idea of how the stats for a weapon upon looking at the information screen.

And for the love of god make the Gantz Rustung NOT CRAP. Why would a weapon that takes that much stuff to create be utterly useless?

Yes. Do this please. Please.

[ClaytonRISING]

I’d never thought I would see the day when a rogue like community wanted simplicity and generic.

What is the world coming to.

[GlyphGryph]

I think all of our ideas are good as long as we stay away from the “remove” mentality. Content is never bad; removing content is.

Hahahaha. Coming from you, this is rich. Haven’t you explicitly argued for the removal of content several times? Haven’t you argued for the removal of content in this very thread? Your opinion in every thread seems to boil down to “I want more of the things I like, and everything I don’t like should be taken out”. So… yeah. Try making an actual argument at some point.

Here’s the reason to “remove content” - games are about making meaningful choices, and in order to make meaningful choices you need to understand the options available. Less choices can often make for better gameplay (or worse gameplay) depending on the situation, and adding more choices can give you fewer meaningful choices overall. A large number of poor choices can obscure the important and meaningful decisions players want to make . A single added piece of content can invalidate the role of numerous others, reducing the number of meaningful choices a player can make. Some content is actively harmful to the theme, setting, or balance of a game. More content means more effort dedicated to balancing it and insuring meaningful choices can still happen. More content can turn many activities from “enjoyable gameplay” to “outright work”.

I am not arguing content should be removed, here - I am arguing against the concept that removing content is never bad, or adding content is always good.

[Ferodaktyl]

i still think that the guns damage mechanic is flawed, and this leads to irrelevant choices as to what particular gun we use in game. when USP 45 ( for example) does over 200 dmg every 4 out of five times what motivation do i have to use anything else? (besides aesthetic reasons / personal preferences)

[ClaytonRISING]

[quote=“Clayton, post:40, topic:4531”]I think all of our ideas are good as long as we stay away from the “remove” mentality. Content is never bad; removing content is.

Hahahaha. Coming from you, this is rich. Haven’t you explicitly argued for the removal of content several times? Haven’t you argued for the removal of content in this very thread? Your opinion in every thread seems to boil down to “I want more of the things I like, and everything I don’t like should be taken out”. So… yeah. Try making an actual argument at some point.

Here’s the reason to “remove content” - games are about making meaningful choices, and in order to make meaningful choices you need to understand the options available. Less choices can often make for better gameplay (or worse gameplay) depending on the situation, and adding more choices can give you fewer meaningful choices overall. A large number of poor choices can obscure the important and meaningful decisions players want to make . A single added piece of content can invalidate the role of numerous others, reducing the number of meaningful choices a player can make. Some content is actively harmful to the theme, setting, or balance of a game. More content means more effort dedicated to balancing it and insuring meaningful choices can still happen. More content can turn many activities from “enjoyable gameplay” to “outright work”.

I am not arguing content should be removed, here - I am arguing against the concept that removing content is never bad, or adding content is always good.[/quote]

In this specific situation there would be nothing gained from, what, removing all the weapons in the game and making them generic?

Context, man, context.

[Luissen]

I feel like a lot of the guns in the game could be rolled together without any harm, because, not having extensively used some of them for real, I honestly don’t know the difference, other than minor operational changes. (so many AR-15 based weapons, a bunch of pistols which are extremely mechanically similar, some shot guns which the companies in question have been suing each other over for infringment) other than their names and their ‘almost same’ stats, they’re functionally identical in Cataclysm.

Don’t get me wrong, I like the variety, but from a usability standpoint, a json nightmare, and design philosophy, if we didn’t have so many gun affectionados, would anyone else really care?

[Inadequate]

Yeah, I feel like a ton of the redundant guns are basically fanservice for the gun fans. You can even see some clamoring for their own favourites to be added earlier on this page. I’m not saying we should remove some, since persuading anyone of that is clearly a lost cause at this point, but maybe the spawn rates on some should be adjusted.

[jimboblordofeskimos]

Generic items are easier to understand but boring, thats why I say leave them out.

I wouldnt be against a reworking of gun/ammo drops though, its probably too easy to become a heavily armed badass atm. Maybe the zombie spawing mechanic as well? Since static spawn was put in guns have gone from being a bit of a last ditch item unless you where running a silenced .22 to more of a ‘hunting cats with a combat shotgun for kicks.’ Though that may be more that im getting better at making OPed chars.

[HunterAlpha1]

here’s a nice, easy to understand zombie apocalypse roguelike for those of you who don’t like so many varieties of guns:

Home | Rogue Survivor Fan Forums

of course, be careful not to play any of the gameplay mods, as those add a couple more firearms to each class, which may be confusing to you.

[Inadequate]

It’s really hard to have a conversation when one half of the debaters appear to know no other technique than condescension and shouting. Do you have anything to contribute to the issue at hand?

[DG123]

I don’t see why generic weapons would be so bad, myself. But i’ve never been to a gun store so that might be my ignorance talking.

Well, how does using generic guns help? I mean if you want “a revolver” and don’t care which, then surely you should be fine with picking up any of the revolvers you find? What’s the problem with having more than one? Just grab one and find bullets for it. What’s the problem with it having a real name instead of “revolver”? Though granted it would help if it told you what kind of gun it was along with the name.

Personally I’d find it annoying having a generic "revolver, a generic “automatic pistol” etc. Especially since it would probably lead to “revolver bullets” “pistol bullets”, “submachine gun bullets”, etc existing. Wouldn’t that screw up sharing ammo between weapons?

[q] I would like to note, however, that most people do not have such an encyclopediaic knowledge of guns that the cataclysm character seems to have. Abstracting guns to generic versions, i think, would be pretty intuitive and less prone to conflicts. We don’t need to think about balancing gun rarity based on the gun’s rarity in real life, only gameplay value. [/q]

I don’t see why we need to worry about that at all. It’s not the real world. It’s a different world. The rarity of each and every weapon can be whatever you care to imagine. Having a minigun in every house would destroy the balance but I don’t see why we can’t just base it on balance mostly… The “realism” part isn’t so important when we’re talking about a world with fusion guns.

[q] I’d like a system where when you look at a gun’s information screen, it displays
Damage: ||
Dispersion: ||||
Recoil: ||
and so forth, maybe with the actual values in parentheses next to the actual display. That way you can easily get an idea of how the stats for a weapon upon looking at the information screen. [/q]

Yes I would love this to be the case. Even better, make it always compare against your current weapon by showing different coloured bars for better or worse on each stat.

I guess I’m just not sure what the point in having generic items would be.

Why not simply have items named better?

“Revolver - Redhawk .44 cal” for example. It would help with sorting items too.

[DG123]

i still think that the guns damage mechanic is flawed, and this leads to irrelevant choices as to what particular gun we use in game. when USP 45 ( for example) does over 200 dmg every 4 out of five times what motivation do i have to use anything else? (besides aesthetic reasons / personal preferences)

Capacity. Firing rate for hitting hard to hit enemies. Reload speed. Range of attachments the gun in question can mount.

Plus, the available ammo types.

Not to mention noise level, although that becomes a lot less important when you put a suppressor on there.

[GrizzlyAdamz]

It’s really hard to have a conversation when one half of the debaters appear to know no other technique than condescension and shouting. Do you have anything to contribute to the issue at hand?

Your own ad-homs & condescension don’t help dude.

[asdfzxc]

I’ve actually been experimenting with a complete rebalance of the existing weapons (as well as the spawn lists) for a few versions now. I think I’ve successfully hit a point with the basic weapons where every one is viable and has a unique role. I haven’t updated a lot of the new weapons yet, but if anybody’s interested I could show you what I have so far.

[John_Candlebury]

We really are an umpleasable fanbase…

What is the problem with guns right now I mean:

You grab a Ruger Redhawk, you have absolutely no idea of what it is other than its possibly a gun.
You (e)xamine the Ruger Redhawk.
Its a pistol! It shoots .44 shots! Its a revolver! You can see a lot of rougelike-like stats! The description mentions it looks like an old Wild west revolver!
You now have a good idea of what a Ruger Redhawk is!

What are you guys doing playing rougelikes if you cant even bring yourselves to examine unknown items.

[DG123]

What are you guys doing playing rougelikes if you cant even bring yourselves to examine unknown items.

It would simply be a lot more convenient if you could look at a shelf of guns and say to yourself “Oh boy there’s a crapload of pistols here.”

Not pick every single one up and examine it in order to work this out.

It’s not like it would need more than a cursory glance to work out that much.