[QUOTE=Scarabix;32873770]So people actually like this pack? Not what I heard, but OK. How do you think they're gonna deal with the junkyard justice's double secondaries? I hope they make a secondary slot that has both a nerfed shotgun and nerfed buff banner, that would be neat.[/QUOTE]
Easy.
New itemsets don't give bonuses, so it doesn't matter.
[editline]20th October 2011[/editline]
IN OTHER NEWS: Tonight is the night.
[QUOTE=ART1E117;32868226]Speaking of Gibuses, I always wanted an unusual Scotsmans Stove Pipe with ghosts so I could rename it as the "Ghastliest Gibus".[/QUOTE]
18 currently in existence; I wish you the best of luck. :)
I still wonder why they bother having sets when there is no bonus. Why not just have it like the australian christmas sets?
And I often see people complaining about these sets being overpowered, but valve could make more items sets like the gas jockey, with a pro and a con that makes it balanced.
No, set bonuses were a horrible idea. Valve realised that, which is why they didn't put any on the Uber Update sets. They're still considered sets because, well, they are sets, they just don't have a set bonus.
[QUOTE=Banjo7J;32874298]No, set bonuses were a horrible idea. Valve realised that, which is why they didn't put any on the Uber Update sets. They're still considered sets because, well, they are sets, they just don't have a set bonus.[/QUOTE]
Thanks for explaining nothing
Edit:
Ze ninjas
They required a hat. The Christmas ones were too unnoticeable to be any good.
Well, the original sets are self-explanatory: You could have two players with identical weapons, but one person has more health or can't die to headshots simply because he was lucky enough to find/craft the set hat. (Or because the other person doesn't like to buy things from the store.) The Australian Chirstmas sets weren't quite as bad, as they didn't need the hat, but it was still a poor idea: You could be losing out on a useful bonus simply because you, for example, never use your melee and would rather have something that gave a passive bonus to a set melee which only affects the melee itself. Or maybe because one of the set weapons is a useless piece of rubbish that Valve refuses to buff. The idea is fundamentally flawed: rewarding players who prefer a certain loadout, with no downside to using said loadout. (other than in the case of the Gas Jockey's Gear and Saharan Spy, but those required the hat) You are rewarding certain players depending entirely on their preference and opinion.
[QUOTE=Jetamo;32874503]They required a hat. The Christmas ones were too unnoticeable to be any good.[/QUOTE]
Are you kidding me?
The medieval medic is a set I always use. You don't know how much good that +4 regen can do. I take it you've never tried it. And I even have the hat for it.
[QUOTE=Banjo7J;32874523]Well, the original sets are self-explanatory: You could have two players with identical weapons, but one person has more health or can't die to headshots simply because he was lucky enough to find/craft the set hat. (Or because the other person doesn't like to buy things from the store.) The Australian Chirstmas sets weren't quite as bad, as they didn't need the hat, but it was still a poor idea: You could be losing out on a useful bonus simply because you, for example, never use your melee and would rather have something that gave a passive bonus to a set melee which only affects the melee itself. Or maybe because one of the set weapons is a useless piece of rubbish that Valve refuses to buff. The idea is fundamentally flawed: rewarding players who prefer a certain loadout, with no downside to using said loadout. (other than in the case of the Gas Jockey's Gear and Saharan Spy, but those required the hat) You are rewarding certain players depending entirely on their preference and opinion.[/QUOTE]
That is strictly wrong. Hibernating bear, medieval medic and expert demo force you to equip weapons that suck (crossbow, warrior's spirit, loch'n'load).
The croc o style was entirely dedicated to counter sniping and was very situationnal. The tank buster was situational too, since it gave you no shotgun and only three rockets.
The only overpowered set in the polycount update was the special delivery, and you had only one real weapon in this one.
I'm gonna be gone for 2 weeks starting the 26th
So I can guarantee you the halloween update will be the 26th
[QUOTE=Scarabix;32874540]That is strictly wrong. Hibernating bear, medieval medic and expert demo force you to equip weapons that suck (crossbow, warrior's spirit, loch'n'load).
The croc o style was entirely dedicated to counter sniping and was very situationnal. The tank buster was situational too, since it gave you no shotgun and only three rockets.
The only overpowered set in the polycount update was the special delivery, and you had only one real weapon in this one.[/QUOTE]
How does this prove me wrong? My point was that it reawrds players based upon their weapon preference, telling me your opinion on some of the set weapons does not invalidate that. Hell, it makes my point stronger. I also never said that any sets were OP. IMO, all the sets are rather UP.
[QUOTE=Scarabix;32874540]
weapons that suck (loch'n'load).[/QUOTE]
Are you kidding me? Loch-n-Load is damn godlike if you have the aim.
[QUOTE=Banjo7J;32874585]How does this prove me wrong?[/QUOTE]
It proves you wrong when you say that it gives advantage to people who prefers these certain loadouts anyway, because without the set bonuses, these loadouts are fucking useless
[QUOTE=DatWut?;32874594]Are you kidding me? Loch-n-Load is damn godlike if you have the aim.[/QUOTE]
But if you don't, the grenade shatters and you better not miss your next shot because you've already fired a half of your grenades!
[QUOTE=Captain Chalky;32874666]Or maybe:
Valve rewards player who uses a certain set with a buff which help him in the new way of playing that set offers. For example the Medieval medic. It gives the player a faster health regeneration which will prove useful as you trade your primary weapon of self defence for ranged healing. Saharan spy which makes you more stealthy as you trade your manual disguise kit for the silent kills and rapid disguise on kill.
Having the hat requirement was a bad idea, but the set bonuses itself were good.[/QUOTE]
That is what I believe. But since not everybody agrees on this, why does valve even bother to keep doing weapon packs that don't do jack shit and not release them without set information instead?
[QUOTE=Scarabix;32874615]It proves you wrong when you say that it gives advantage to people who prefers these certain loadouts anyway, because without the set bonuses, these loadouts are fucking useless[/QUOTE]
What? That doesn't make any sense. My point is that people who, for example, prefer certain minguns over others shouldn't get extra resistance from crits, they should just get the minigun they prefer. Your opinion that the set weapons are horrible only strengthens my point. Say you were using the Expert's Ordnance set, but with the normal grenade launcher instead of the Loch-n-Load. Should someone with the full Expert's Ordnance set take longer to die from fire just because he prefers the Loch-n-Load? No.
[editline]dasd[/editline]
[QUOTE=Captain Chalky;32874666]Or maybe:
Valve rewards player who uses a certain set with a buff which help him in the new way of playing that set offers. For example the Medieval medic. It gives the player a faster health regeneration which will prove useful as you trade your primary weapon of self defence for ranged healing. Saharan spy which makes you more stealthy as you trade your manual disguise kit for the silent kills and rapid disguise on kill.
Having the hat requirement was a bad idea, but the set bonuses itself were good.[/QUOTE]
I see your point, but at the same time, there's still the fact that someone who doesn't particularly like L'Etranger because he can get his cloak back perfectly fine without it, and instead uses the Ambassador to get sneaky kills gets cheated out of the set bonus, simply because he has no use for one of the weapons from it.
Anyway, we should just stop arguing about it now, because at the end of the day, it's our opinions that set bonuses are a good or bad idea, and arguing isn't going to change that.
As much as I like the Junkyard Justice and Gardener Pyro barring the hat I would not mind them never being released if it meant that the heavy duty medic was never released either.
[QUOTE=Captain Chalky;32874666]Or maybe:
Valve rewards player who uses a certain set with a buff which help him in the new way of playing that set offers. For example the Medieval medic. It gives the player a faster health regeneration which will prove useful as you trade your primary weapon of self defence for ranged healing. Saharan spy which makes you more stealthy as you trade your manual disguise kit for the silent kills and rapid disguise on kill.
Having the hat requirement was a bad idea, but the set bonuses itself were good.[/QUOTE]
I think Valve shoudl remove the hats on the requirements for the bonuses. But then again, the Shortstop/Scout Set would get way more annoying.
[QUOTE=Banjo7J;32874696]What? That doesn't make any sense. My point is that people who, for example, prefer certain minguns over others shouldn't get extra resistance from crits, they should just get the minigun they prefer. Your opinion that the set weapons are horrible only strengthens my point. Say you were using the Expert's Ordnance set, but with the normal grenade launcher instead of the Loch-n-Load. Should someone with the full Expert's Ordnance set take longer to die from fire just because he prefers the Loch-n-Load? No.[/QUOTE]
Yes they should. Because they chose to play the way it was meant to be played. Even if that makes no difference with the expert's ordonance because this set bonus has no drastic effect on gameplay, it's nice to have a little set bonus to reward you for using the degreaser with the powerjack instead of the axtinguisher.
Without the set bonus, nobody would ever equip the powerjack with the degreaser. Just look at the scottish handshake and the bootlegger. Why would anyone equip them together if there's not set bonus whatsoever?
Because they look much better than the items they're reskins of.
Not going to be tonight, considering the small update they did earlier. Why didn't they just save that for the supposed larger one coming later? Eh?
[QUOTE=Scarabix;32874795]Yes they should. Because they chose to play the way it was meant to be played. Even if that makes no difference with the expert's ordonance because this set bonus has no drastic effect on gameplay, it's nice to have a little set bonus to reward you for using the degreaser with the powerjack instead of the axtinguisher.
Without the set bonus, nobody would ever equip the powerjack with the degreaser. Just look at the scottish handshake and the bootlegger. Why would anyone equip them together if there's not set bonus whatsoever?[/QUOTE]
Personally I think there shouldn't be a set bonus, but one of the items gets it. Ie: the shortstop gives scout 25 more health, or the sydney sleeper/danger shield blocks headshots.
[QUOTE=Jacen;32874829]Because they look much better than the items they're reskins of.[/QUOTE]
But they don't go with each other at all, and a set bonus would actually make it appealing to use them [B]together[/B], which you have no reason to do now
[QUOTE=Scarabix;32874795]Just look at the scottish handshake and the bootlegger. Why would anyone equip them together if there's not set bonus whatsoever?[/QUOTE]
Because they're fun to use together?
[IMG]http://cloud.steampowered.com/ugc/578936979384338974/7E11D4324968F2DD18E98EA8D5D98AD227A6C926/[/IMG]
My favorite Demoman loadout.
[QUOTE=Captain Chalky;32874392]Tell me why set bonuses were a bad idea. I'm curious what nonsense response you can think of.[/QUOTE]i agree with you the worst part was the hats and then the second bundle of set bonuses was meh
[QUOTE=DatWut?;32874959]Because they're fun to use together?
[IMG]http://cloud.steampowered.com/ugc/578936979384338974/7E11D4324968F2DD18E98EA8D5D98AD227A6C926/[/IMG]
My favorite Demoman loadout.[/QUOTE]
Why would you even do that?
Without a set bonus, this loadout is completely pointless.
[QUOTE=Scarabix;32875032]Why would you even do that?
Without a set bonus, this loadout is completely pointless.[/QUOTE]
It doesn't matter if it's pointless for gameplay purposes. As long as they have fun using it then it isn't pointless to use it.
[QUOTE=Scarabix;32875032]Why would you even do that?
Without a set bonus, this loadout is completely pointless.[/QUOTE]
The additional health, for survival, on the bootleggers, in conjunction with a generic melee which means no stats to mess about with or worry about, can be useful for both defensive demomen like him, or air-sticky-detonation demomen who generally use the default Sticky Launcher.
It's also extremely satisfying to stickyjump and smash your enemies face in with a lucky crit using the default bottle, and i'd imagine the same with that.
[QUOTE=Jacen;32875075]It doesn't matter if it's pointless for gameplay purposes. As long as they have fun using it then it isn't pointless to use it.[/QUOTE]
But it IS pointless gameplay-wise. In your logic, it would be OK if valve kept on putting reskins of weapons.
Gameplay-wise, and this is the only thing that matters in this discussion, this set is USELESS.
*snip*
n[QUOTE=Marik Bentusi;32875137]They de facto discouraged people to try out new item combinations.[/QUOTE]
No it didn't. Most of the time, i see people using items that are part of sets without equipping the whole set. Just compare the number of puff & sting players and players with the jockey's. Not a lot of people use the whole set yet they are all using the degreaser
Scarabix, your opinion is your own and I respect that. But you should too, opinion is not fact and most people here are disagreeing with you, yet you refuse to either back down and accept they have differing opinions, or accept that actually, they do have a point.
You also disagreed with my post without actually saying anything against it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
