Grenades - Need to be nerfed

[Lord Frunkamunch]

Another thing. No matter what weapon you choose, you still have grenades. To compare the kills of a SINGLE primary to that of grenades is ridiculous. Logically, because not everyone uses the same weapon, you could assume that with 10 primary weapons, grenades having 10 times the kills could practically be EXPECTED. The real number is not even close to this.

so you cant compare nades with anything other than nade itself. So in other words, you cannot nerf them or do anything.

How the hell nades got implemented in the first place?!?!

I think you misunderstood. He's saying that there are 10 seperate guns with 10 seperate scores because you have 10 guns to choose from. But at the same time everyone has nades. So in theory if 10 people played, grabbed different guns, and got 9 kills with their guns and one with the grenade, there would be 9 kills with every gun and 10 with grenades, so the numbers are skewed.

*edit*
Now it is possible to nerf them, although they are in a league of their own, but I don't think they should be.

Exactly. Even though nades are used very little in comparison they show up high on the list. Obviously, judging by stats alone grenade usage isn't quite that low (after all, it's just an example), but it certainly isn't high to the level that comparing it to a single gun makes it out to be.

[excruciator]

Exactly. Even though nades are used very little in comparison they show up high on the list. Obviously, judging by stats alone grenade usage isn't quite that low (after all, it's just an example), but it certainly isn't high to the level that comparing it to a single gun makes it out to be.

very little? are you kidding me? Have played a gather? or seen one?

are you saything that if the weapon is overpowered, but if everyone uses them of has them, its balanced?

the problem is, if you are comparing player to player. everyone has nades, so it makes player vs player relatively balanced.

however, if you are talking about nade vs primaries, in this case, nades kills primaries. just like how knife can own mp5s in close range. Eventhough they are part of two distinct groups (prime and secondary) the secondary in question is still much more powerful than the primary. (same for the nade and primary) Comparison or no comparison, that is the truth.(goodbye "you cant compare nade to primary because they are in very different groups")

I think a grenade is the most dominant weapon of all, just because in a clanwar or gather official u have 3 nades, and throwed correctly, that means 3 instant deaths

Code: [Select]

http://forums.soldat.pl/index.php?topic=18189.120#quickreply


Truth be told.(dominant or overpowered? both I guess)

[Lord Frunkamunch]

Read my post until you get it. Thanks.

[excruciator]

Let me explain my post a little.

very little? are you kidding me? Have played a gather? or seen one?

this part answers your post. I have nothing else to add or argue because its just plain wrong.

Nade is in fact overpowered and overused.

And that all your post was worth. One line of criticism and a question of reliability.

are you saything that if the weapon is overpowered, but if everyone uses them of has them, its balanced?

the problem is, if you are comparing player to player. everyone has nades, so it makes player vs player relatively balanced.

however, if you are talking about nade vs primaries, in this case, nades kills primaries. just like how knife can own mp5s in close range. Eventhough they are part of two distinct groups (prime and secondary) the secondary in question is still much more powerful than the primary. (same for the nade and primary) Comparison or no comparison, that is the truth.(goodbye "you cant compare nade to primary because they are in very different groups")

Here is the  counter arguement for people saying that "you cant compare nades because everyone has them"

[Lord Frunkamunch]

My post wasn't even directed toward you...I was talking to the guy who started this topic. Specifically, about his stat list and why it's obvious nades are going to have a high comparative usage no matter what.

And you're still proving nothing as far as I can see. All you've made clear is that someone using only primary weapons will lose against someone using both grenades and weapons, which, if the last thread is any clue, translates to You vs. everyone else. Saying that someone using grenades can beat someone not using them is just stating the obvious, not a watertight counter argument.

[excruciator]

And you're still proving nothing as far as I can see. All you've made clear is that someone using only primary weapons will lose against someone using both grenades and weapons, which, if the last thread is any clue, translates to You vs. everyone else. Saying that someone using grenades can beat someone not using them is just stating the obvious, not a watertight counter argument.

correction, someone using primary weapon will lose against nades. The role of primary nowdays is simply to "steal" kills from the nades.

Sure, I might just be stating the obvious but sometime people just can't see it. The role of primary is being overshadowed by nades. Like other weapon balance threads, a weapon is overpowered when another weapon overpowers the rest of the weapons(or most) by a lot. And thats exactly what nades are doing, overpowering the primaries. Hell this can even be a textbook example of a weapon being overpowered.

One might argue that since everyone has them, its fair. if thats true, why bother nerfing ruger? everyone can simply get the same weapon as the counter.
+ this isnt all about the players, its about the usefulness of a weapon. And right now, no weapon is in the right role.(because nade is filling its role)

[ElGato]

And you're still proving nothing as far as I can see. All you've made clear is that someone using only primary weapons will lose against someone using both grenades and weapons, which, if the last thread is any clue, translates to You vs. everyone else. Saying that someone using grenades can beat someone not using them is just stating the obvious, not a watertight counter argument.

correction, someone using primary weapon will lose against nades. The role of primary nowdays is simply to "steal" kills from the nades.

Sure, I might just be stating the obvious but sometime people just can't see it. The role of primary is being overshadowed by nades. Like other weapon balance threads, a weapon is overpowered when another weapon overpowers the rest of the weapons(or most) by a lot. And thats exactly what nades are doing, overpowering the primaries. Hell this can even be a textbook example of a weapon being overpowered.

One might argue that since everyone has them, its fair. if thats true, why bother nerfing ruger? everyone can simply get the same weapon as the counter.
+ this isnt all about the players, its about the usefulness of a weapon. And right now, no weapon is in the right role.(because nade is filling its role)

In a 1v1 where I used only weapons against even the best 'nader using the only grenades I would still almost guarantee a win for myself. Grenades don't take the place of guns, they are just extremely convenient close up and add a lot to a players game if he/she has mastered them. MAYBE too much, but like I said before I don't think it's as bad as you guys make it out to be nor do I care if it stays the same or changes.

[excruciator]

And you're still proving nothing as far as I can see. All you've made clear is that someone using only primary weapons will lose against someone using both grenades and weapons, which, if the last thread is any clue, translates to You vs. everyone else. Saying that someone using grenades can beat someone not using them is just stating the obvious, not a watertight counter argument.

correction, someone using primary weapon will lose against nades. The role of primary nowdays is simply to "steal" kills from the nades.

Sure, I might just be stating the obvious but sometime people just can't see it. The role of primary is being overshadowed by nades. Like other weapon balance threads, a weapon is overpowered when another weapon overpowers the rest of the weapons(or most) by a lot. And thats exactly what nades are doing, overpowering the primaries. Hell this can even be a textbook example of a weapon being overpowered.

One might argue that since everyone has them, its fair. if thats true, why bother nerfing ruger? everyone can simply get the same weapon as the counter.
+ this isnt all about the players, its about the usefulness of a weapon. And right now, no weapon is in the right role.(because nade is filling its role)

In a 1v1 where I used only weapons against even the best 'nader using the only grenades I would still almost guarantee a win for myself. Grenades don't take the place of guns, they are just extremely convenient close up and add a lot to a players game if he/she has mastered them. MAYBE too much, but like I said before I don't think it's as bad as you guys make it out to be nor do I care if it stays the same or changes.

Only way that a weapon user can beat a nade user in a 1 on 1 is if you stay FAR FAR away from them. Or picking a weapon that has a high dps than 2 nades, such as ruger, or barrett. Of course, if thats nades only counter, It seems pretty obvious that its too good.

m79 in vers 1.3.1 was very powerful. People demanded for a nerf because it was really really good at close range. People argued that you can just stay far away and kill them and it doesnt need the nerf. Its Deja vu all over again.(replace m79 --> nades)

[SDFilm]

And you're still proving nothing as far as I can see. All you've made clear is that someone using only primary weapons will lose against someone using both grenades and weapons, which, if the last thread is any clue, translates to You vs. everyone else. Saying that someone using grenades can beat someone not using them is just stating the obvious, not a watertight counter argument.

correction, someone using primary weapon will lose against nades. The role of primary nowdays is simply to "steal" kills from the nades.

Sure, I might just be stating the obvious but sometime people just can't see it. The role of primary is being overshadowed by nades. Like other weapon balance threads, a weapon is overpowered when another weapon overpowers the rest of the weapons(or most) by a lot. And thats exactly what nades are doing, overpowering the primaries. Hell this can even be a textbook example of a weapon being overpowered.

One might argue that since everyone has them, its fair. if thats true, why bother nerfing ruger? everyone can simply get the same weapon as the counter.
+ this isnt all about the players, its about the usefulness of a weapon. And right now, no weapon is in the right role.(because nade is filling its role)

In a 1v1 where I used only weapons against even the best 'nader using the only grenades I would still almost guarantee a win for myself. Grenades don't take the place of guns, they are just extremely convenient close up and add a lot to a players game if he/she has mastered them. MAYBE too much, but like I said before I don't think it's as bad as you guys make it out to be nor do I care if it stays the same or changes.

I agree.

And you're still proving nothing as far as I can see. All you've made clear is that someone using only primary weapons will lose against someone using both grenades and weapons, which, if the last thread is any clue, translates to You vs. everyone else. Saying that someone using grenades can beat someone not using them is just stating the obvious, not a watertight counter argument.

correction, someone using primary weapon will lose against nades. The role of primary nowdays is simply to "steal" kills from the nades.

Sure, I might just be stating the obvious but sometime people just can't see it. The role of primary is being overshadowed by nades. Like other weapon balance threads, a weapon is overpowered when another weapon overpowers the rest of the weapons(or most) by a lot. And thats exactly what nades are doing, overpowering the primaries. Hell this can even be a textbook example of a weapon being overpowered.

One might argue that since everyone has them, its fair. if thats true, why bother nerfing ruger? everyone can simply get the same weapon as the counter.
+ this isnt all about the players, its about the usefulness of a weapon. And right now, no weapon is in the right role.(because nade is filling its role)

In a 1v1 where I used only weapons against even the best 'nader using the only grenades I would still almost guarantee a win for myself. Grenades don't take the place of guns, they are just extremely convenient close up and add a lot to a players game if he/she has mastered them. MAYBE too much, but like I said before I don't think it's as bad as you guys make it out to be nor do I care if it stays the same or changes.

Only way that a weapon user can beat a nade user in a 1 on 1 is if you stay FAR FAR away from them. Or picking a weapon that has a high dps than 2 nades, such as ruger, or barrett. Of course, if thats nades only counter, It seems pretty obvious that its too good.

m79 in vers 1.3.1 was very powerful. People demanded for a nerf because it was really really good at close range. People argued that you can just stay far away and kill them and it doesnt need the nerf. Its Deja vu all over again.(replace m79 --> nades)

Exept that nads have limted ammo, everyone has them, and they arn't launched or do damage in the same way that the M79 does.

[excruciator]

And you're still proving nothing as far as I can see. All you've made clear is that someone using only primary weapons will lose against someone using both grenades and weapons, which, if the last thread is any clue, translates to You vs. everyone else. Saying that someone using grenades can beat someone not using them is just stating the obvious, not a watertight counter argument.

correction, someone using primary weapon will lose against nades. The role of primary nowdays is simply to "steal" kills from the nades.

Sure, I might just be stating the obvious but sometime people just can't see it. The role of primary is being overshadowed by nades. Like other weapon balance threads, a weapon is overpowered when another weapon overpowers the rest of the weapons(or most) by a lot. And thats exactly what nades are doing, overpowering the primaries. Hell this can even be a textbook example of a weapon being overpowered.

One might argue that since everyone has them, its fair. if thats true, why bother nerfing ruger? everyone can simply get the same weapon as the counter.
+ this isnt all about the players, its about the usefulness of a weapon. And right now, no weapon is in the right role.(because nade is filling its role)

In a 1v1 where I used only weapons against even the best 'nader using the only grenades I would still almost guarantee a win for myself. Grenades don't take the place of guns, they are just extremely convenient close up and add a lot to a players game if he/she has mastered them. MAYBE too much, but like I said before I don't think it's as bad as you guys make it out to be nor do I care if it stays the same or changes.

I agree.

And you're still proving nothing as far as I can see. All you've made clear is that someone using only primary weapons will lose against someone using both grenades and weapons, which, if the last thread is any clue, translates to You vs. everyone else. Saying that someone using grenades can beat someone not using them is just stating the obvious, not a watertight counter argument.

correction, someone using primary weapon will lose against nades. The role of primary nowdays is simply to "steal" kills from the nades.

Sure, I might just be stating the obvious but sometime people just can't see it. The role of primary is being overshadowed by nades. Like other weapon balance threads, a weapon is overpowered when another weapon overpowers the rest of the weapons(or most) by a lot. And thats exactly what nades are doing, overpowering the primaries. Hell this can even be a textbook example of a weapon being overpowered.

One might argue that since everyone has them, its fair. if thats true, why bother nerfing ruger? everyone can simply get the same weapon as the counter.
+ this isnt all about the players, its about the usefulness of a weapon. And right now, no weapon is in the right role.(because nade is filling its role)

In a 1v1 where I used only weapons against even the best 'nader using the only grenades I would still almost guarantee a win for myself. Grenades don't take the place of guns, they are just extremely convenient close up and add a lot to a players game if he/she has mastered them. MAYBE too much, but like I said before I don't think it's as bad as you guys make it out to be nor do I care if it stays the same or changes.

Only way that a weapon user can beat a nade user in a 1 on 1 is if you stay FAR FAR away from them. Or picking a weapon that has a high dps than 2 nades, such as ruger, or barrett. Of course, if thats nades only counter, It seems pretty obvious that its too good.

m79 in vers 1.3.1 was very powerful. People demanded for a nerf because it was really really good at close range. People argued that you can just stay far away and kill them and it doesnt need the nerf. Its Deja vu all over again.(replace m79 --> nades)

Exept that nads have limted ammo, everyone has them, and they arn't launched or do damage in the same way that the M79 does.

In that case, nade is also more powerful than a m79 because:

it doesnt even have a reload, and has a clip of, 3-5 usually.
its dps is much faster than m79.
It does not occupy a "space". Its not either a primary nor a secondary. So you can still carry something else to use when nades are gone. (m79s cant)

[SDFilm]

If you use those up quickly. you don't have nades for the next incounter (unless it's a small map with lots of nade boxes).
And the M79 isn't supposed to have a primary to fall back on, as it is the primary. Though if the M79'er wants to use a different weapon for whatever reason, there is secondary and auxillery.

[Extacide]

Ugh, no computer sucks. I don't think I can format my post properly with PS3 so if it becomes a gigantic chunk, there isn't much I can do about it. Oops, appears I can.

First of all, I think I might have sent the wrong demo, but irregardless just look at the grenade use, not how many kills are actually from grenades. Its a pretty good view of how dependent our soldat clan community is on grenades and their ability to hit people upon contact.

To intervene in this argument however, first of all: It is true that you must add up all 10 primaries and then put them in a ratio along side grenades to properly gauge their use. However, that will not give you a 100% indication of the grenades' use compared to the actual primaries. I'd come up with a formula for this, but without my computer I just don't feel like it. The stats however, are deceiving in both ways that they don't represent each primary's use in accordance with the gigantic number from grenades, but each primary isn't used equally along side the other-

Date Posted: April 25, 2008, 10:59:41 pm-primaries. Secondly concerning the stats, it doesn't represent the entirety of grenade usage, it only shows the end result KILLS from grenades. However, grenades are used MUCH more then the stats show, because often grenades (as I have explained before) are used as an initial attack upon a player, almost 80% of the time weaking them while they use their primary to finish off this player, registering the kill as a primary, when 95% of the damage was done with a grenade. If you do not play competitively in clanwars or gathers, you will NOT see this nearly as often in public servers, which is why some of you are unable to relate. This is an issue primarily in the competitive scene of soldat.

Continuing, I have also seen it made an argument that there is only a limited number of grenades. Okay? Woop-dee-freaking doo. You can go back for more grenade kits, which is what ALOT of players will do in a scrim/CW, considering a full pack of grenades gives a player a much better chance to kill than without grenades. -

Date Posted: April 25, 2008, 11:04:47 pmAlso, don't forget to account into the equation how often a PLAYER DIES, and respawns with a free pack of grenades. Considering a player may die anywhere from 10-40 times in a given clanwar, it can be safely said they refresh their grenades with each respawn, not counting any chance they come back for more grenades assuming they did not die on the rush, leaving a typical player with a ranged total from 30-120 grenades PER clan war, not counting any extra grenades they picked up, at the same time not counting the chance they skipped over picking up the grenades.

Sorry for the triple-post, but the PS3 won't let me type any more without having to continue on a second post. -_-

Date Posted: April 25, 2008, 11:08:32 pmOh and no offense ElGato, but when was the last time you actually played? I haven't seen you play in a LONG time, but then again DC rarely scrims DETH/OC, whom doesn't appear to be that active anymore. The grenade use is much worse now then it was back then. You can not get CLOSE to a player. I literally mean, you can NOT get close to a player at all, and not expect him to unleash his payload in your face, 75% of the time putting you at VERY low health, the other 25% finishing you off/killing you. I mean, grenades themselves wont become useless if they recieve the nerf I suggested in my first post. They'll be as useful as ever, but they won't be the weapon of who can run the fastest on a rush, or who ever throws first at medium-close range. :/

[excruciator]

If you use those up quickly. you don't have nades for the next incounter (unless it's a small map with lots of nade boxes).

soldat is a very quick paced game. people usually get a max of 2-3 kills before dying. Now, when you die, you get 1-3 nades, and usually there are nades boxes near spawn points to make a refill. 3 nades = 3 kill. you can easily get 3 kill before you die. Resulting in 3:1 KD ratio. So actually, supply isn't a problem. Just get a refill everytime you spawn like most players, than you can get a 3 kills, (2 if you are not as lucky) before dying.

Also, it sounds to me that you have a problem with nades running out. Perhaps you would like to see infinite nades in the next version of soldat.

And the M79 isn't supposed to have a primary to fall back on, as it is the primary. Though if the M79'er wants to use a different weapon for whatever reason, there is secondary and auxillery.

Yes, that is another advantage of nades that m79 aint got. Nades are powerful yet not a primary and don't get a slot, m79 is, and occupy a slot.

[ElGato]

-_-

Date Posted: April 25, 2008, 11:08:32 pmOh and no offense ElGato, but when was the last time you actually played? I haven't seen you play in a LONG time, but then again DC rarely scrims DETH/OC, whom doesn't appear to be that active anymore. The grenade use is much worse now then it was back then. You can not get CLOSE to a player. I literally mean, you can NOT get close to a player at all, and not expect him to unleash his payload in your face, 75% of the time putting you at VERY low health, the other 25% finishing you off/killing you. I mean, grenades themselves wont become useless if they recieve the nerf I suggested in my first post. They'll be as useful as ever, but they won't be the weapon of who can run the fastest on a rush, or who ever throws first at medium-close range. :/

The last time I did some gathers actively was about a month ago, has everyones play style changed that much since then? And why do you want to get so close to someone anyway? It's like asking to get a couple grenades to the face... I don't really play anymore so I guess me arguing my point is a little silly, maybe things are as bad as you and excruciator say.

[excruciator]

-_-

Date Posted: April 25, 2008, 11:08:32 pmOh and no offense ElGato, but when was the last time you actually played? I haven't seen you play in a LONG time, but then again DC rarely scrims DETH/OC, whom doesn't appear to be that active anymore. The grenade use is much worse now then it was back then. You can not get CLOSE to a player. I literally mean, you can NOT get close to a player at all, and not expect him to unleash his payload in your face, 75% of the time putting you at VERY low health, the other 25% finishing you off/killing you. I mean, grenades themselves wont become useless if they recieve the nerf I suggested in my first post. They'll be as useful as ever, but they won't be the weapon of who can run the fastest on a rush, or who ever throws first at medium-close range. :/

The last time I did some gathers actively was about a month ago, has everyones play style changed that much since then? And why do you want to get so close to someone anyway? It's like asking to get a couple grenades to the face... I don't really play anymore so I guess me arguing my point is a little silly, maybe things are as bad as you and excruciator say.

Its always been that way. But you are a rugerer, I guess you don't really have experienced much close quarter combat.

[The Owls]

Grenades are not as big of a deal as most people are saying.  They're a part of the style and game-play we all have come to know.  Without them, there would be almost no break-away triple kill plays for a cap and so forth.  The game would be, in my opinion, boring without them.

I admit, they are used quite a bit, especially clan wars, gathers and so forth.  They are a rusher's best friend, evening out the height advantage most people try to use.  Personally, I would much, much, much rather see the grenades register more before we even think about balancing them.  Though since that's not really possible, at least at the moment, the only thing I can see being done to the grenades, is the rate that they can be thrown. 

This is all we really need done to nerf them for right now.  As of this moment, people can unload their three grenades in an instant, giving them a lot of margin for error.  Slowing this down will help separate the nade spammers, from the people who can actually aim with them.  I think this is a good compromise between those who want a complete nerf, and those who want them to stay the same.

[excruciator]

Grenades are not as big of a deal as most people are saying.  They're a part of the style and game-play we....

Sorry, I didnt bother finishing off the two line.
I've seen you play, and you can't do anything without nades and that knife of yours. Honestly, I think the minimi its just for show.

Not a big deal I guess.

[Ziem]

The Owls - I agree on adding the delay on nades' - it will prevent nadespam ... and further talking about how nades are overpowered.

excruciator - Don't flame others for using nades and killing someone with those. :s

Unfortunately, all those stats and stuff are against the theory that nades are overused and overpowered - it's around 20% of kills, which is relatively small amount (Everyone has nades = everyone can make a nade-kill.)


So putting the delay between throwing nades (fireinterval.. ;d) - F12
Other ideas - F11

[jerich]

Grenades are not as big of a deal as most people are saying. They're a part of the style and game-play we....

Sorry, I didnt bother finishing off the two line.
I've seen you play, and you can't do anything without nades and that knife of yours. Honestly, I think the minimi its just for show.

Not a big deal I guess.

And how would you know how good he would be without them? You can't compare him using nades vs. without any nades because there has always been nades(at least since I have played). Trying to rate a player's skill without any constructive criticism. Next time, don't base the total skill of a player over one dimension of the game. Have you even considered his momvement, his accuracy, and his ability to play smart?

By the way, since you seem to talking hotshot and all...
Who are you?

[Lord Frunkamunch]

Don't mind him, he always resorts to that when he runs out of arguments.