You slowed down metallic??!... I quit. This is just like when you guys slowed down all the guns earlier before. Idk why u guys keep changing the guns speed and changing the brightness of the guns. This game is supposed to be challenging and fun. Not adjusted so everyone can be on the same level.  

Well isn't that challenging and fun for new players?  

They ARE 1000, and all the others are around 6000-1000.

EDIT: Just tried it out. This is unacceptable. Change it back please >.<  

Omg... Just found the metallic slowed down and so did the shotgun... I basically wasted 5k or whatever on both those guns. Please stop making unecessary updates. You guys should get the consent of the players before making such terrible adjustment (just like you did at the beginning at conquest).  

This happening at the eve of a new gun release is no coincidence.

If I had to guess, I'd say they lowered the speed on it to justify the price on the newer, more expensive guns. The Metallic Rifle was rather fast, especially for its low price. To make the newer guns worth buying, they had to increase the gap between a similar-classed gun costing 1k and one costing 10k.

The only ways to increase this gap would have been either:

• Lower the fire rate on the cheaper gun
• Lower the damage on the cheaper gun
• Make the newer ones absurdly fast
• Make the newer guns ridiculously overpowered in terms of damage, clip size, or reload freeze.

The route they took was the right one. Lowering the damage on the Metallic Rifle would PAR it with the starter ER Beamer. The other options would have had a permanent negative effect on game play; all future guns would have to meet the absurdly high tier, else nobody would purchase them.

Evidence of this mistake being made is on iEra, with the BAR. It dominates all guns, and forever will because of its price tag. The staff members can't change it because people have spent good money on it(It's worth 200k, which is right around $70USD). Now, any gun that will be released on iEra must meet this gun in tier, or it wouldn't be purchased. Fortunately, the Metallic Rifle is nowhere near this price, and iZone staff can change it without being accused of robbing people blind.  

They didn't have to do all that -.- all they had to do was lower the damage on non expensive guns and raise the damage on higher expensive guns. What I wanna know is why they messed with the speed and the brightness. I don't want this game going slow... I want it to be fast when I'm basing or at showdown or something. It's like you guys are changing the guns to satisfy new players. And everytime u make a good gun u always say its OP and change it, wtf.  

Posted by fUnK

They didn't have to do all that -.- all they had to do was lower the damage on non expensive guns and raise the damage on higher expensive guns. What I wanna know is why they messed with the speed and the brightness. I don't want this game going slow... I want it to be fast when I'm basing or at showdown or something. It's like you guys are changing the guns to satisfy new players. And everytime u make a good gun u always say its OP and change it, wtf.

That's the threading of a very unrewarding future in terms of gun variability and value.

If we kept increasing damage as newer guns were released, we'll eventually have a gun that's a 3-hit kill; which will result in monotonous game play, and people complaining on these forums of overpowered weapons.

It would also cause the price eventually to go way up on these overpowered weapons, and we'd find ourselves with Zone's version of the BAR; a gun that, despite the high volume of complaints staff receive, cannot be touched because people have spent good money on it.

It's a good idea to keep a broader gap from gun to gun, in terms of function. If we hinge on just altering damage, there will be little variability, and the expectations of new releases would be highly predictable. People would always expect a bigger, better, more overpowered gun instead of a 'different' gun. I'd prefer to keep the skill in the game, and have more variability than to take such a route that would lead to "pay to play" mentality.

As it is, the Metallic Rifle can still compete with the higher priced guns. If we took your suggested route, the Metallic Rifle will eventually not be able to contend; it would eventually be trumped in terms of damage and fire rate, and the skilled players would be competing with rich newbies with a handicap.

I'd rather we focus on releasing 'different' guns every release, instead of 'more powerful' guns. Altering variables such as clip size, recoil, reload freeze, special functions, and projectile animations instead of focusing solely on damage and fire rate will make each gun unique and worth the purchase; as it would have its own strengths and weaknesses in a check-and-balance fashion. This check-and-balance system will also prevent guns from getting too expensive in the future, and specialty items such as those given during times of holiday will preserve their value.  

Exactly I agreed with you Funk. What I'm feeling is that the staffs are only looking at the new players perspective not ours (experienced). Yes the guns seems powerful because the newbies haven't experience anything similar to this type of Sci-Fi shooter. Yes most of us sparrers uses it in spar, yes is good but it easily dodge-able if you get enough practice. On the other hand Metallic rifle is terrible at basing, pking and somewhat showdown. Bottom line, change it back how it was.  

Posted by Meph

That's the threading of a very unrewarding future in terms of gun variability and value.

If we kept increasing damage as newer guns were released, we'll eventually have a gun that's a 3-hit kill; which will result in monotonous game play, and people complaining on these forums of overpowered weapons.

It would also cause the price eventually to go way up on these overpowered weapons, and we'd find ourselves with Zone's version of the BAR; a gun that, despite the high volume of complaints staff receive, cannot be touched because people have spent good money on it.

It's a good idea to keep a broader gap from gun to gun, in terms of function. If we hinge on just altering damage, there will be little variability, and the expectations of new releases would be highly predictable. People would always expect a bigger, better, more overpowered gun instead of a 'different' gun. I'd prefer to keep the skill in the game, and have more variability than to take such a route that would lead to "pay to play" mentality.

As it is, the Metallic Rifle can still compete with the higher priced guns. If we took your suggested route, the Metallic Rifle will eventually not be able to contend; it would eventually be trumped in terms of damage and fire rate, and the skilled players would be competing with rich newbies with a handicap.

I'd rather we focus on releasing 'different' guns every release, instead of 'more powerful' guns. Altering variables such as clip size, recoil, reload freeze, special functions, and projectile animations instead of focusing solely on damage and fire rate will make each gun unique and worth the purchase; as it would have its own strengths and weaknesses in a check-and-balance fashion. This check-and-balance system will also prevent guns from getting too expensive in the future, and specialty items such as those given during times of holiday will preserve their value.

I don't mean stack the damage and prices up on each other. The damage can range in the middle of probably 3 and 12... They don't have to keep goin up and up. And what in saying is that if your going to change one aspect of a gun, say the speed, and make it horrible, you should atleast make another aspect of the gun better... Say the damage. There doesn't need to be very good guns that I will always use and guns that I probably will never touch again, referring to metallic lol, (R.I.P. Metallic), oh and tashkin told me the only reason he changed metallic was to make it worth it's price, so if that's true you better refund me on that goonadier, because if I remember correctly it costed more than 20k and it don't do sh--  

Posted by fUnK

(R.I.P. Metallic)

 

Posted by fUnK

And what in saying is that if your going to change one aspect of a gun, say the speed, and make it horrible, you should atleast make another aspect of the gun better... Say the damage.

This is exactly the type of check-and-balance I was talking about.

There's different classes of guns, which is defined by their function. Assault Rifles(Automatic and Semi-Automatic), Shotguns, Pistols, and Specialty(Grenade launchers, Goonadier). And for every class there's different tiers, which is decisive on their price.

Two guns in the same class and tier should equate to roughly the same amount of worth, but should do so by having trade-off of equally-weighed variables; such as trading damage for fire rate, and vice-versa.

Posted by fUnK

There doesn't need to be very good guns that I will always use and guns that I probably will never touch again, referring to metallic lol, (R.I.P. Metallic)

Gun choice is user preference.
Me, for example, prefer a gun with recoil, because I use it to propel myself around during a fight, giving me the edge of mobility. This recoil may throw somebody else's style off, though. I also prefer a gun that's semi-automatic to one that's automatic; an old habit from PC Era that required me to tap my fire button, as holding it down left you vulnerable due to the freeze it entailed.

Posted by fUnK

..you better refund me on that goonadier, because if I remember correctly it costed more than 20k and it don't do sh--

I'd have to agree. The Goonadier isn't worth the price; and unfortunately that's a gun that is very limited to variability, because of its already unique function. The only way I could see the Goonadier being fairly improved would be to give it a broader, static spread. Meaning that it would fire in the direction the user demands, but the distance it travels would randomly vary between 3 tiles away to as far as about 10 tiles away. These numbers are theoretical, I'd have to play with it before giving a definite distance window. To compensate, I'd also play with the clip size and freeze to make sure it's worth the value while not making it overpowered.  

I get what ur saying, but what IM saying is that the reason metallic was popular was because of its speed. The speed was lowered farther than what I would have expected and the damage is low. The starter weapon is better than the metallic :/ that's why I'm saying Id be surprised if I see another person use metallic again.  

Posted by Meph

This happening at the eve of a new gun release is no coincidence.

If I had to guess, I'd say they lowered the speed on it to justify the price on the newer, more expensive guns. The Metallic Rifle was rather fast, especially for its low price. To make the newer guns worth buying, they had to increase the gap between a similar-classed gun costing 1k and one costing 10k.

The only ways to increase this gap would have been either:

• Lower the fire rate on the cheaper gun
• Lower the damage on the cheaper gun
• Make the newer ones absurdly fast
• Make the newer guns ridiculously overpowered in terms of damage, clip size, or reload freeze.

The route they took was the right one. Lowering the damage on the Metallic Rifle would PAR it with the starter ER Beamer. The other options would have had a permanent negative effect on game play; all future guns would have to meet the absurdly high tier, else nobody would purchase them.

A reasonable/logical thinker you are. I really like your vast knowledge of these weapons.

The amount of complaints I have received about the Metallic Rifle being over powered compared to guns that players paid 5-10 times the amount for out way the few that complain about it. The speed wasn't drastically changed as all of you are making it out to be. It was changed from .25 frequency to .35 and the damage remains the same.

As much as I would love to give every player exactly what they want that just isn't possible. The Metallic Rifle will remain how it is now, which is more than reasonable for the cost of the weapon.

As for the shotgun, the speed of the bullets and the bullet power were never changed. I don't know why you assume it was changed but it wasn't.

Posted by fUnK

I get what ur saying, but what IM saying is that the reason metallic was popular was because of its speed. The speed was lowered farther than what I would have expected and the damage is low. The starter weapon is better than the metallic :/ that's why I'm saying Id be surprised if I see another person use metallic again.

The starter weapon is not better than the Metallic Rifle. The starter weapon is 1 less damage and the speed is the same as the MR.  

Lets see uh... Metallic, easy to dodge... Starter, harder to dodge... And 1 damage more than starter? Wow that's nice. If it actually hits me  

Thank you for the feedback it will soon be checked by admins