Goonhub
03-13-2017, 06:26 AM
(This post was last modified: 03-13-2017, 06:28 AM by Sundance. Edited 1 time in total.
Edit Reason: itsy bitty edit
)
Eh.
I don't think the problem is the pull mechanic being changed so much as the knowledge that this is going to be one of those things that's going to take an abnormally long amount of time to adjust (see: Taser change)
I just think using the server as a testbed is a bad idea when there are serious balancing issues that come to the fore almost immedietely when implemented. That should be a sure sign to revert the change, and then approach it again when it's properly adjusted. Rather than the current form of changing it and just leaving it to fester.
I really need to emphasise that I don't think the average goon is against this change. Change is good and this change has a good motive behind it. It's the process of it, and the knowledge that this is going to be a while before it's adjusted to a managable level.
Finally, for most nerfs I'm of the opinion that is something is nerfed heavily, then there is two routes that you need to take. First route is to nerf it and leave it at that. For the most part this route isn't really justified, but there are times where it's required because it's being abused (see Loafer). The second route is to nerf it and expand upon alternatives.
In this case, the alternatives are very limited, which is why it should be reviewed.
I don't think the problem is the pull mechanic being changed so much as the knowledge that this is going to be one of those things that's going to take an abnormally long amount of time to adjust (see: Taser change)
I just think using the server as a testbed is a bad idea when there are serious balancing issues that come to the fore almost immedietely when implemented. That should be a sure sign to revert the change, and then approach it again when it's properly adjusted. Rather than the current form of changing it and just leaving it to fester.
I really need to emphasise that I don't think the average goon is against this change. Change is good and this change has a good motive behind it. It's the process of it, and the knowledge that this is going to be a while before it's adjusted to a managable level.
Finally, for most nerfs I'm of the opinion that is something is nerfed heavily, then there is two routes that you need to take. First route is to nerf it and leave it at that. For the most part this route isn't really justified, but there are times where it's required because it's being abused (see Loafer). The second route is to nerf it and expand upon alternatives.
In this case, the alternatives are very limited, which is why it should be reviewed.