"It became simpler by an order of magnitude"
"They’ve balanced the game with newcomers in mind"

Yet cypher still won the last 125fps cup, and if he enters today, who would bet against him winning that too.

I'm just saying they have simplified things somewhat, but really, there is still a ton of meta in the game which means you won't get anywhere in this game without serous talent. Anymore than you'll beat usain bolt running across a beach because its not a race track.

P.S.
Cypher not playing today, so looking at the roster I will predict a fazz vs toxic final, with toxic winning based on his tourney history.
http://125fps.challonge.com/sundaycup84

Let's see how that pans out.

P.P.S
Raisy as an outside bet :)

I would bet on him losing considering that he's just one guy in a volatile bracket with at least a few good players.

I should add to this:

If they are making the game for newcomers in mind and the game will still be insanely hard to play for them then what was the point? You either make it extremely biased for newcomers or don't do anything at all, there's not really a compromise here. Trying to make both sides happy limits top level play and still makes newcomers ragequit.

EDIT: There's two things that fix noobs from getting raped and they are matchmaking and a big player base and they can be independent on whether the game has a high skill ceiling or not (Starcraft and Dota for example). If only they had matchmaking for QL when there were high numbers (or at all lol) then noobs can join and stay and not get kicked out of the few servers that exist for imbalancing teams and play on an even playing field.

That is very true, about bias.

And about compromise - I think it impossible, and they do understand it's impossible, but they're still doing it, because it's the "only way".

I've watched myself (I'm almost at the age of 30), and how I play QC.
I know I will never play QC for money - there's too much life in the way, to support myself and do things IRL, so no time there. Same goes for other people. So after 5-7 games, I click the "quit" button at the top right corner, and go do something else.

So - they cannot make the game for the old q1, q2, q3, qL public, just like me, because after few games we just quit to do something else, we don't have the time. They cannot make the game for this kind of playerbase, because it's unstable, fluctuating all the time, even if it's a dedicated and dependable playerbase.

They cannot make a Overwatch clone either - it would not do much, people would just go back to Overwatch, which is somewhat established already. It would be an easy game for noobos, on a quake platform, and most pros would not bother anymore.

So they're going for a middle ground. I actually don't have anything against that, had they made the game feel more like quake (maps are ok, but the characters have a clown-ish feel to them - made a post about it here if anyone's interested https://bethesda.net/community/topic/61789/i-...f-the-game ).

My biggest gripe with it is probably the duel mode. I understand exactly why and what is up with it, and in some ways, I don't think they could've done it any differently. However, it doesn't feel like duel that is interesting to watch, it looks like chaos mode.

Some pros say "it's ok, we kind of like it", but I believe that with time, some problems with this mode will come to light, and it will be hated quite severely.

Also, as a small note - some say they enjoy "Sacrifice". I have not enjoyed watching it, and I have not enjoyed playing it.
It's especially harsh for new players, because you not only have the objective of collecting armors/hp/weapons throughout the map, but your head hurts about the map's objective, the skull. There simply is just too much to do.

From a newcomer perspective, had sacrifice been made "instagib", it would cater towards newcomers, but right now...Nope.

Really great interview! (imo)

Really good read. I was really suprised how smart Cypher played in first 125fps tournament. He was really picking up champions who were good counter pick against opponents champions. He was not picking champs that he played a lot with them like 95% of other participants. In this interview he explained it all. Hes really smart player and hes really having a potencial to become the world best quake champ player, however I knew that even before that on-line tournament started that hes already the best player and hopefully he will remain the best at least for me personally.

sounds like cypher mad

Great interview

May be someone feels that he praises the game.

But i feel fundamental issues with game in his words.

bad armor\hp caps, bad timelimit, bad fraglimit, bad 30/30 instead of 25/30, bad 25 armor instead of 50 etc etc etc....

Hey, devs, we have been passed through all of this in Quake games before, so nothing good in 25 armor, hp/armor caps, 30/30 instead of 25/35, small timelimit, small fraglimit, round system.

Hey, devs, we have been passed through all of this in Quake games before, so nothing good in 25 armor, hp/armor caps, 30/30 instead of 25/35, small timelimit, small fraglimit, round system.

what are you talking about? i agree that there are issues and that there is easy room for improvements, but we have definitely not "passed though all of this" considering that champions fundametally change how max stacks and an elimination system work.

Fantastic interview! Cypher is so insightful and wise. It's always better when they interview him not in english, because so he can be much more articulate and deep.

I didn't find him disliking the game. To the contrary, he sounds excited and motivated. He points out some immediate "flaws", but he makes clear the game is not better or worse, just different and new.

His major "critique" is something that nobody talks about, the machinegun damage, that helped him in winning last week. It's constructive criticism, and he isn't negative at all.

Also interesting to hear what happened with the CSGO first and Overwatch then career paths.

Interesting how he seems to focus so much on the champion-countering meta.

I remember Cypher being positive about freaking Shootmania and calling it's gameplay "interesting".

Also, why would he be negative about QC? It's a great opportunity for him to win some major bucks.

Yep, this is why pros' opinions can't really be expected to be honest on these matters.

Untwist your pants, i replied to a guy up there that tought Cypher was negative. He isn't, he sounds genuinely interested in the game.

Y'all must stick in your mind that all those pros have played unhealthy amount of hours on the same game, usually even when they didn't feel like it. So any change is welcome, just because it's a change. A breath of fresh air.

Almost all the pros enjoy this game. More than actual casuals even. The dislike single variables, but on the whole, they like it. For now at least.

Well that's a very broad brush.

Is it fair to say Quake Champions has become too much of an arcade game?|


It became simpler by an order of magnitude. This is a game in which you can’t heal yourself back to full, the way you could in previous Quake instalments; you can’t stack up and just circle the map killing everyone. That’s why the game used to be one-sided; there would be the one guy who was killing everyone and having fun.

Here, it’s built a bit differently. You’ve got abilities you can use in a mass fight, and besides, a hero has a health cap that can’t be exceeded. No matter how many megahealths and armors you pick up, if you get hit from a railgun, the second hit will kill you, unless you’re some super-fat tank. And if you are a super-fat tank, you’re very easy to hit.

They’ve balanced the game with newcomers in mind. In Quake III, you respawn with a machine gun, 125 HP, and zero armor, and until you pick up a good gun and a more or less decent armor suit, you won’t be fragging anyone. Here, you can take down someone who’s full-HP with just that machine gun. You can’t be chased around spawn points. The abilities, the invisibility, the orbs, the teleports, it’s all about doing everything to prevent top-tier players from owning noobs, to stop noobs having 0/45 runs.

so where does he say he dislikes it??

He subtly hints, so as not to scare away the newcomers.

Or maybe, God forbid, he actually likes the game?

I think there's neither a positive or negative tone in the statements regarding to gameplay. He just describes what the game is like.

this tbh

so you have to read his mind

ok

I didn't find him disliking the game.

He is a pro though. You shouldn't shit on a game, when you are going to be playing for the publisher of that game's money.

Not that it will stop some people, but it is very unprofessional.

Did Cooller suffer from a flesheating parasite at that time?

ESL banned steroids

cutie

srsly? J_J

C O O L L E R
O
O
L
E
R

no homo

homo homini erectus est!
=)

well, didn't he get married?

LMAO@Skint.

just bad photoshop imo.

great interview and a cool insight into cypher's thoughts about QC.

I like that his 2 favourite characters are the least picked while the 2 he hates are the ones 90% of people pick =)
Interesting take on Galena for countering Anarki too... and I'm with him on no more remakes of maps!

Great interview!

Glad I caught him streaming a little while ago, was fun to watch his reactions live. However, now that 1mil.$ is on the line, that is not going to happen.

They'll all go "secretive", except, perhaps, Cooller, he doesn't give a sh*t :D

__

And in all honesty, yes, the game has become more simple and noob friendly, and at the same time - much deeper, chaotic, hardcore and harder to make sense of.

There are more new mechanics that you now have to "count-into" the equasion.

Cypher is excluding Anarki and Sorlag. In all honesty, I think he might want to make a different account and secretly play Anarki, to get fluent with it.
Nobody knows how the game's balance will change, and it's always "wise to train your left, non-main hand, just in case you break your right one".


One thing I do find annoying, is how some champions are mediocre, and some are "all round too good".

Sorlag.

She's a tank, but she can move around the map very very fast - a thing Clutch cannot do. And in tankyness - there's not much difference in between them. Clutch is just outright worse and less useful, much less useful.

Her ability. Take Visor, for example. Such a "niche" wallhack ability, it can be used both defensively and offensively, however - the opponent knows when it's been used, so it becomes even less impactful by quite a %, had you compared it with "silent usage". Also - Visor's "uncapped" speed is nothing. You don't have space to reach anything meaningful. While Sorlag can bend corners, which in essence gives him the same, if not better, speed.
So whilst Visor's active WH ability is "indirect" and debatably weak (in comparison to other champions), Sorlag has a spit ability, that has all kinds of applications:

- A - it's an offensive tool.
- B - it's a defensive tool - both area denial + discourages players to continue the fight
- C - it's a wallhack. If the opponent even touches spit, which is lying on the ground, you can track damage numbers through walls.
- D - blinding effect (if spit hits you directly).

It's quite stupid, how overpowered she is to other champions. She's versatile in every category you look at. Other champions tend to be "bad at something, whilst good at other things".

The only possible downside could be the hitbox.

But we're talking about highest rank of play, we're talking tournament finals.
The people in those tournaments will have such high railgun and LG accuracy, independant of sensitivity, that hitbox size is not really a problem. It is a slight factor, yes, but Sorlag has saving grace - CPMA movement.

I will give an example. Cooller's stream, vs base (or was it nitrino/agent). Someone from his friends. So Cooller is standing on the Red Armor (big armor) bridge on DM6, waiting for RA to spawn. He's got a railgun, and is aiming across the map towards the teleporter exit near the Quad. He knows his opponent should come out some time soon. He's zoomed in. And it happens. His opponent (using Sorlag), exits the teleporter exactly on Cooller's crosshair, and Cooller instantly reacts and shoots directly at Sorlag. But he misses. Why ?

His opponent, exiting the teleporter, instantly made an "Anarki-like weave to the side, CPMA movement". And the sight of that was so confusing to the eyes, so speedy and so disrespectful to the prediction machine in our heads, I felt how Cooller doubted. I doubted as well.



So either Sorlag gets nerfed hard, or champions like Clutch, Visor and perhaps even Slash, which is quite squishy, have to get quite substantially better.

I really don't understand what they're doing with Clutch/Visor.
Clutch is just outright useless, no matter who plays it, I just have a field day on it. That 20% damage reduction is an absolute nothing, when you have BJ with duel wielding LG, or Anarki, who hits you with railgun on a drive-by, then hits you again from the different side of the map 1.5 seconds later lol.

Visor, as well. Quite useless. Especially in team games, where you constantly feel lacking something defensive/offensive. They think the WH ability is outright overpowering every other ability, so they've done a huge cooldown on it. So now you cannot rely on it. Also - Visor's foot "cyber-flesh-mech-tech-bleh" jumping and running sound is so annoying, I cannot play him. It's like - I do like squeaky doors and beds, but there are some of them that are just outright annoying to the bone.

I dont know, but these champions constantly make you feel like a tool. There's something essential lacking with them. They're basicly both Nyx's counters. That's the only time you use them - to counter Nyx.

tbh the most OP champion is anarki for me and not sorlag. Sorlag, at least to my level, not pro and not noob, is very easy to hit with lg and rockets. U might be right that at pro levels that easiness might not matter, since they aim like aimbots regardless the hitbox size.

also anarki is awesome to watch and play if u know how to move, but ruins the game of his opponents. None wants to play vs someone that moves so fast, with small hitbox, who is very hard to hit. Ur aim acc becomes garbage and the wow moments are not there. for example, u will never get the feeling that u get when u track sorlag with lg. generally, is fun for whoever plays him, but not so fun for everybody else, since vs anarki u just play for the win and not for any enjoyment. having said that, even anarki is not very OP, just a bit imo. apart from clutch who they will buff, the others seem pretty balanced.

> Also - Visor's foot "cyber-flesh-mech-tech-bleh" jumping and running sound is so annoying, I cannot play him. It's like - I do like squeaky doors and beds, but there are some of them that are just outright annoying to the bone.

WORD!

I think you're underestimating Visor, Cypher uses it a bunch. He's reasonably tanky and reasonably fast, even if less fast than CPMA champions. And true wallhack is not comparable to grenades / galena traps / sorlag spit, not even close. It paralyzes movement, prepares or gets you out of dangerous future fights. I also think the hitbox matters nearly or just as much with good aimers, they all hit less vs smaller hitboxes.

I agree that sorlag is absurd, though. Needs a hard HP nerf.

PS. Smagu matyt Lietuvi cia ;P

Yes, Visor has it's uses.

Yet, there's the question - how can Visor paralyze movement, if the opponent is fully stacked, has all guns and is chasing you down.
WH does have many uses, but it's importance goes up in tense situations.

Yet Quake Champions has simplified Mega/RA mechanics + champion abilities, that punch down the importance of a WH.

Visor's ability would be very strong in stock QL 10 minute duel, yet in this...I don't feel it yet. Maybe time will show.

What we need is exhibition matches, with Visor vs Sorlag or Visor vs Anarki, played over and over, to fine tune it for competitive play, before the "beta" is over, and some inappropriate decision gets stamped as good.

PS. Sveikas.

Yet, there's the question - how can Visor paralyze movement, if the opponent is fully stacked, has all guns and is chasing you down.

Well, it basically means that he can get some damage in at the start. So, not much if you're a fat sorlag, but a lot if you're a fully stacked anarki (as that rail/rocket before the fight might put you at a disadvantage). And you can just run away, which isn't paralysis but it may change his movements or chasing pattern, and make you survive which is all that matters.

Besides, this is just for when he's chasing you down. There are many other situations to think about, in many of which he's useful.

Anyway, time will show indeed.

Been watching Fatal1ty stream, he's exclusively using Visor at the moment.

There's really not much wrong with it, and Fatal1ty's quite good at the game. He's been having most trouble with "rocket delay" and again, Sorlag. Hits sorlags with rail 2-3 times, and they still manage to escape. And if it's close quarters, he gets spit on by sorlag and finished up quite fast, which ends up as "where are my teammates". That does not happen often, but it does, it's quite clear cut.

I don't know, maybe time will tell. Just feels like Visor's movement could be improved, I'm talking about that passive. They just recently added +10% buff in acceleration while he's in air, but maps, in reality, are quite small and made of bendy corridors, just feels like it "could be more", in comparison with Slash's and Anarki's movement.

The closest champion to Visor is Ranger, which has the ability that is both very strongly defensive and both offensive. I've watched the sunday cup recently, where, if I remember corretly, it was Toxjq, who in the moment of a slight desperation (was a very close quarters LG fight), just through the teleporter at the face of the opponent who was fully stacked (it was the start of the fight, they just met), and instantly killed with the teleporter, winning the fight.

So from that, I get the feeling that Visor's active ability WH is a good tool, but for it to work, his movement has to be slightly better around the map, so that he could actually use it.

What we need is exhibition matches, with Visor vs Sorlag or Visor vs Anarki, played over and over, to fine tune it for competitive play, before the "beta" is over, and some inappropriate decision gets stamped as good.

howq would that help? first of all duel is only one part of the game and even more importantly, not all combinations of champions need to be 50/50. part of what makes the new duel mode interesting is countering. what keeps visor relevant is that he counters the most common champion nyx imho

That is very true, about 50/50.

Some german WW2 fighter pilots, in their interviews after the war said, that in order to be competitive up there in the sky, the plane has to have unstable. Meaning, that it cannot be limited to mediocrity. Menaing, that if the plane is unstable, and you're a virtuoso pilot, it will give you an upper hand in the fight.

in post #42 I've mentioned something, and that is one of the reasons why I think "it would help" to keep looking at Visor. I still do think his active ability is not having "a good conversation" with his passive.

Visor just feels like Ranger without the orb. Even if his movement is uncapped; due to map design, you cannot get a good % of benefit from it.

I dunno, am I really wrong about it ?

"And in all honesty, yes, the game has become more simple and noob friendly, and at the same time - much deeper, chaotic, hardcore and harder to make sense of."


Was a bit interested in the long rant, but sorry, stopped reading there.

What I meant by that is - even if the game is noob friendly, it still has the same mechanics like quake live (mostly).

When you see pro's play, their mind games go to a very high level. If both of the pros know each other from fights before (q3, ql), they can predict a lot. Now that there's CPMA and q4 movement added, now that there are perks for champions and there's hitbox bs*, it basicly makes this quake game a Quake Live with a huge mod, that branches out with it's mechanics. The more new stuff, the more players have to think about and incorporate thinking reflexes into their split second decisions, or vice versa - fight themselves not to become reflex-only players that only react.

There's order in chaos, and only the truelly gifted and patient can make $ of it.

That's just pseudo-deepness stuff, giving some extra layer of chance to much lower skilled players, while removing a LARGE chunk of TRULY quake-mechanics (and deepness) in tandem with the other changes, so the casuals will leave the sinking ship a bit laters.


You know it's lmao when evil drops out from a 'duel' tournament vs. sl1p.

Actually, quake-mechanics are quite similar.

I do not like the new armor system and some other bits myself, I loved the old duel format much more. But these guys at ID might have mathematicly counted everything out. There's a reason for everything in the game, and the more you play it, the more you find out why "this has been done like that" and etc.

About evil...
I don't know him personally, so I can only speculate on the surface. But judging him according to facts, I'd say this - he's a very slow learner, imho.

1) He was around since early days of q3, if I remember correctly, playing q3 tdm (?)
2) It took him what - 10 years to learn quake, his style, duel, etc.
3) His style is quite different, very tactical, but it might him take huge effort and time to learn QC, just like with q3.



And that is the thing. Adaptation. It's a very important human quality. If you cannot adapt - that's it you're dead. You've become old. You're a pensioner. People who linger in the past and who try to make the present and the future just like the past, are no longer young people.

And quake is a game for teenagers, basicly. At 14-16, when your genes are most active, when your brain is most receptive and open to new things, that is the time when all quakers shine. It happened with cypher, fatal1ty, me and most other people, whatever they choose - basketball, quake, bikinis (girls are most beautiful at that age, do you not agree?).

So either evil adapts, or he's out. It's not the game's fault.

Going off on a bit of a tangent here, don't you think?

Changes you have control over that are not improvements should be rejected.

What the hell does this have to do with what age girls are most attractive?

There's a saying, from where I come from, which goes like "soul is healthy in the body of the healthy".

Our hormones are most active at the age of teens, our "perfectionism" is most strong at that age, we have not had too many "let downs" or "falls from high up" at that age. We don't doubt ourselves as much, we don't hesitate, we just take everything in.

I've watched myself at that age, and I'm quite sure of this. Just think about it.

And quake is quite special, like that - it is such an exhilarating, such a hard and tiring game, that it brings the age old problem of "young vs old" to daylight.

There used to be a somewhat pun/joke in my language, which went on like this (im awful at re-telling, so bare with me):
There were both men and women, stranded on two islands in the ocean. Men on one (of different age) island, and women on the other.
Men that were of age 18, immediately started planning and getting ready on how to cross that bit of water, to get to the women. Others, at that were at the age of around 30, started building shelters, cleaning around themselves, "getting prepared". And the much older ones just said "Naaah. They (women) will eventually come on their own".

And I think you can see a lot of this in life. Whether it's women, frags, fortune or whatever. Even in the ways professionals of quake play, they have these qualities, no matter the age.
For instance, cooller - even at the early age, his style was always that of the "30 year old". He would constantly build pressure, collect everything on the map, but he would never rush to kill you. He would be perfectly happy with 1 frag throughout that map.
Av3k was always different - he would constantly engage you, choke you, pressure pressure pressure, untill you'd cave in. He used to do that without any armor and only 1 weapon collected.
Whilst Cypher was a whole lot of a different animal, he kind of combined all of the possible styles into one, he would even "steal small tricks" of his opponents and would incorporate them into his own play. Constantly improving, outwitting etc. Thats why I always found him most fun to watch.

And I'm sorry, I'm misreading this one "Changes you have control over that are not improvements should be rejected.". Math is not on point in me today, would you explain :)

Haha story time with coyob. Yep, definitely going off on a tangent here.

There are some trends, but I don't think everyone develops the same way as they get older. Are you going through a crisis now that you're about to hit 30? :P

Explaining what I said: You were talking about adaptation. You adapt to changes in your environment that you can't control. But if you can control those changes, you don't need to adapt; you simply reject what is not an improvement in your eyes.

I don't see what game you choose to play as an uncontrollable environmental change.

You adapt to changes in your environment that you can't control. But if you can control those changes, you don't need to adapt;

That is true. But what can you control about the differences inbetween QL and QC ?
If you're a pro, your choice is simple - adapt and go for the prizemoney of a new game, or change your angle and go into a different game altogether.

By the way, here's another story. There was a couple (married) of scientists, who had a new born child. They got a little monkey from somewhere (dont remember that part), which was of same age, exactly. So they thought it would be a good idea for the two to grow together, they though the monkey would gather more human qualities.

But as time went by, they've noticed that the child started copying the monkey and acting towards it's example. He was becoming a monkey.

You can make a lot of conclusions from this, but one thing is quite clear - we, as humans, are very good at adapting, no matter the surrounding. It's one of the most important qualities we have in-born.

When we grow older, we stop doing that. That was my point with all the jibberish stories.

you simply reject what is not an improvement in your eyes.

This is not as simple as you put it.

Choice is the problem here.
If there's no choice (take year 1996, quake 1), then you adapt, because there's no alternative. And considering quake1, we're talking - there's no other choice of an FPS like that around, altogether. So if you want to experience it - you just give in.
Now, if there IS choice - take year 2016 - where you can play any military shooter, new Unreal Tournament, Quake Live, Quake Champions, Overwatch etc. You become arrogant - you start giving demands.

So what you're saying on "improvement"...How do you know it's not an improvement. I don't think word improvement is correct here (most of the time), I think the word "different" would be more suiting.

Quake 2 was different to Quake World. Was it worse ? Better ? Why ?

Any answer you give will be biased, and the bias ties either to personal grudges, or spectator related bias or other stuff.

Most people have a choice about what games they choose to play. They could just not play games at all and do something else with their time. How do you know Evil doesn't have other choices than to play QC? Maybe he will later, who knows.

You assume he can't adapt, but you don't know his reason.

Yes, people can adapt. That's great, but it is irrelevant. You're trying to say older people are universally defective or something, which is not true.

What you think is improvement is exactly that. It doesn't matter whether you are biased. Biased or not, why should you choose changes for yourself that you don't think are improvements?

If my wall is blue, and I like it blue, and I don't think red is better (my biased opinion), why would I paint it red?

No, we really don't need more people accepting changes they don't like if they have anything at all to say about it.

As I have said before, the primary attraction of QC is its novelty and its potential to actually be a half-popular game (which I'm starting to doubt now).

Some things have been deliberately done to make the game easier, and now we have people saying these things add "depth" (a repeatedly abused word by the way).

You assume he can't adapt, but you don't know his reason.

Yes, this. I think I assumed there wrong, due to lack of knowledge. My bad, sorry :P

Yes, people can adapt. That's great, but it is irrelevant. You're trying to say older people are universally defective or something, which is not true.

Older people TEND to be less adaptive. There are very few who reach older age with their hearts and eyes still open, lets say it like that.

And about being defective. Yes, they're defective, in a pure biological sense, as in reflexes and thinking time. However, they're superior in their wisdom and experience. What I'm saying is, and what I've experienced myself - in first person shooters (not only quake) - you may plan out the situation, you may do a double-fake and completely out-wit the guy, but if he hits 95% of his bullets and you miss a lot of yours when you're in a superior position, which YOU KNOW you should win, that's a clear brain vs animal situation. And it happens a lot.

What you think is improvement is exactly that. It doesn't matter whether you are biased. Biased or not, why should you choose changes for yourself that you don't think are improvements?

Well, that is my philosophical point here. Not thinking that something is an improvement, by judging it with an opinion, which has been formed by past events, is a form of stagnation.

If my wall is blue, and I like it blue, and I don't think red is better (my biased opinion), why would I paint it red?

Is there money involved in the wall painting decision ? Is everybody else re-painting their walls because of "fashion" reasons ?
Those are the factors that influence Quake Champions the most. Playerbase and moneyprizes. It's not just the fun of the game. It has to be universal in many ways, has to be on a hype. What makes a hype ?

No, we really don't need more people accepting changes they don't like if they have anything at all to say about it.

That is both true, and not true at the same time.
This is a very long discussion, that goes into such topics like "did they know how to make good games better back in the day, when everything was starting out ?" "How did they make Starcraft, Doom, Quake and Cod games so perfect the first time they tried ?".

As I have said before, the primary attraction of QC is its novelty and its potential to actually be a half-popular game (which I'm starting to doubt now).

I do have that feeling as well, that due to current demographic and mentality of new gamers, that have been pampered by society and volumes of different games, that make them heroes without working their asses off, may be the downfall of arena shooters.
Our way of thinking may become dinosaur-extinct, no matter how big it is.

Some things have been deliberately done to make the game easier, and now we have people saying these things add "depth" (a repeatedly abused word by the way).

I think you're wrong here, in such way of thinking. Just look at the high level of play. Don't the new mechanics provoke more intense thinking, risk and other stuff ? Doesn't the addition of so many things give an overload to the pros ?

And I'm talking in a sense, where oldschoolers meet, who have met in tournaments in quake3 and quake live. They mostly have same skillsets, but now they're in a completely different sandbox.

The rules are the same for everyone. If there are exploits - everybody can use them.

And if it's easier, would you mind naming some things that are easier, for instance, in a match up of toxjq vs nitrino or cypher vs fazz, in the most recent sunday cup ?



It's always fun talking to you, Captain, but by scrolling up and down the page, I get the feeling some people might go epic-quoting and telling us "get yourselves a room you two" :D

I see you have written a long post, which makes it hard for me to write a short one. But this is not really a subject I wanna go back and forth for days on, writing long posts.

Older people TEND to be less adaptive.

Healthy people have the capacity to adapt just fine for the majority of their lives. The only thing that changes is whether they WANT to change. What changes is their motivation, their priorities, what they find "cool" and want to invest a lot of time getting good at, and who they want to impress. Many 40 year olds are more adaptable than teenagers.

Yes, they're defective, in a pure biological sense, as in reflexes and thinking time.

Using this logic, 14-16 year olds are defective because they are immature, inexperienced, and lack knowledge.
Using this logic, a healthy new born baby is DEFECTIVE because he can't walk yet.

Yes, people deteriorate in some areas as they get older, but I think you're exaggerating how much. It sounds like you're comparing a 16 year old to a 90 year old. Reaction time barely changes over the course of most of your life.
The advantages a 16 year old has in this area are small. In just about every sport, people peak at a much older age than this, and then go on to play long after that. And most sports are much more physically demanding than Quake.

When you're losing to someone in those aim situations, he either got lucky, or you failed to factor in his better aim, or your aim is just not on a level where you can compete. If you're not even 30 yet, that means in all likelihood, your aim was NEVER good enough to beat him. What, did you have a stroke since you were 16?

Not thinking that something is an improvement, by judging it with an opinion, which has been formed by past events, is a form of stagnation.

So it would be better if we decided what is improvement based on nothing at all? In other words, flip a coin to determine whether it is better or not?

All we have is our experiences. Improvement will always be subjective.

People only choosing improvements won't result in stagnation---which would imply no changes at all, which would mean no people see any improvement ever.

Change is not inherently good, and lack of change is not inherently bad. The sun has been rising on this earth for billions of years, and no one wants that to change, so it is not stagnation. Lack of unwanted change is not stagnation.

You change things because you think it is better or because you are bored, and when you are bored, you value what you have less, so you are more likely to think something else is better anyway.

Is there money involved in the wall painting decision ?

What game I choose to play is exactly like what colour I paint my wall. It's a matter of taste.
Money is not a factor in it for me in any way.
Money may be a factor for Evil since he competes for money, but if what you say is true, and he is not playing QC, then obviously money wasn't a big enough factor for him either.
Money is a factor for a Zenimax exec, but who fucking cares.
I choose a game based on whether I enjoy the game. The only time profitability factors into this is when the size of the player base affects my enjoyment. That's your boredom. Same players all the time creates boredom.

Don't the new mechanics provoke more intense thinking, risk and other stuff

I don't wanna go into a critique of QC too deeply because y'know it is just gonna be a debate of people throwing opinions around, and it is a fun game.

Depth as I see it means there is a lot of thinking to be done about a game and that people will be discovering new possibilities with an unchanging ruleset for a long time. It also means that during a match, there is a wide range in how well players can apply that.

I'm seeing a lot of randomness in QC, and that's where your risk is coming from.

Going after your opponent with full stack, doing everything right, and then dying in an instant to a Dire Orb is not really depth to me.

Putting Galena totems in front of teleporters isn't depth to me either. Where you see depth, I see cheese. :P

QC has removed a large amount of the "depth" existing in previous Quake around maintaining a superior stack. Stack isn't as significant a thing anymore. That means, in your previous scenario, the amount of "brain" you can use to get advantage in a fight has been reduced. That's how it seems to be at this point. Do the abilities make up for that?

Sometimes you can get a lot of depth from simplicity, and when you add a heap of things, you don't add depth; you just create a mess. You can have something narrow and deep, or you can have something wide and shallow.

Anyway, there is no debate here. There will just been opinions and more opinions. It doesn't matter anyway because we will see with our own eyes what happens. This conversation started because you went off on a tangent about the virtues of youth as if we're all a bunch of geriatrics who can't change what side of the bed we wake up on.

lol?

Evil was a great player even back in the day and won two asus cups, beating players like Cooller, Jibo, b100.death or morfez.
And afaik he had a break for 5-7 years, he wasnt 'learning his style'. Actually when he started playing ql he became a top tdm player within a year and a top dueller within two. I wouldnt call that slow learning, really.
I wouldnt call him 'very tactical', either. His strength is combat and that might the reason why he's struggling in QC, as the damage output is sometimes rather random. Or maybe he just has a shit pc, who knows.

Adaptation.

Oh fuck off. People have to adapt to things that are faster, more complex or require completely different skillsets. I havent seen anyone here complain about QC being too demanding. Its the exact opposite, degeneration. I see quake old-timers complaining about the lack of challenge, nothing else.

Also, I dont find girls between 14-16 the most attractive.

Thanks about that tip on Evil, didn't really know exactly what was going on, only the fact that he took a lot of time to come into the scene.

I wouldnt call him 'very tactical', either.

Well, both Cypher and another analist called him tactical, and Evil himself likes to think of his playstyle as tactical.

In all honesty, I don't think he's going to have too much trouble in QC, but he'll have to work hard to get the same shape he had in QL.

I havent seen anyone here complain about QC being too demanding. Its the exact opposite, degeneration. I see quake old-timers complaining about the lack of challenge, nothing else.

I think you're basing your opinion on gameplay that is too early. People haven't really played the maps enough, and the system itself, enough, so that we could put a finger on anything and call it "viable" or w/e.

Of course, the pros dont struggle, when you watch them play PUB. And there has not been a serious tournament yet, only a few Sunday Cups, that have been won by both Cypher and Toxjq, and some random E3 event.
The matches in these are hard to follow. Duel, 5 minutes for a round. Nothing really happens. 1 champion gets killed, so the losing pro pulls out another one. The whole "meta" changes, new tactics come in. Before those "tactics" can be exploited, fullfilled or w/e, some other champion gets killed, and it's all over again.
Duel is chaos atm. Nobody knows what to play yet, nobody knows where is "the edge" and how to exploit anything, to be competitive.
Nyx looks to be good, but Cypher came in with Galena, which was buffed. And after some patches, again, things will change. And they'll have to re-evaluate, adapt and go from there AGAIN.

And they haven't all met in a main event. WHEN they meet each other in a big event, trust me, you'll see the struggle, and imbalances in the game will show very clearly. If not first even - then on a later note.

I see quake old-timers complaining about the lack of challenge, nothing else.

Would you mind pointing towards a quote, or a video timestamp, where some pro says that ? Preferably tournament play, because pub play is irrelevant - same thing would happen in QL, Q3 or w/e.

-Cypher called Evil's style mostly retarded, bullshit and said he does things that dont make sense. Rapha said pretty much the same in one of his more recent streams, even though he was more tactful about it.
Fact is, Evil engages in situations noone else would and wins them because of his fantastic first rockets and top-notch dodging. That's combat skills, not tactics.

-Whether QC has been figured out or not is irrelevant. Your previous main argument was that QC was somehow the next step which forced people to improve and adapt. Thats simply not true because of the sheer principles that have been dumbed down. Speedcap, lower item importance, press F for free damage / selfheal / wallhack / get out of jail free card. Theres less reward for skill and lower demands on players. You would make a point if this was Q4 and crouchsliding, but its not.

-"They’ve balanced the game with newcomers in mind" (c) Cypher, source:the article on this page.
But I wasnt talking about the pros. For them, the challenge is money, not the game. And with a million dollar prize pool, they already have their challenge.

-Cypher called Evil's style mostly retarded, bullshit and said he does things that dont make sense. Rapha said pretty much the same in one of his more recent streams, even though he was more tactful about it.

I do have knowledge of these quotes, they happened in Quake Live. Glad we're all on the same page.

Fact is, Evil engages in situations noone else would and wins them because of his fantastic first rockets and top-notch dodging. That's combat skills, not tactics.

That is very true, and I've seen it happen a lot of times from Cypher's perspective.
You see - setting up such a situation, where you would engage in a bold way when you should lose is tactical knowledge. If you do it anywhere - you will lose yourself. You have to count it out, so that it's a certain type of surprise, or you have and advantage that the enemy cannot see.

I've done that in Cod2 countless times. So did Michail Tal (Latvian chessmaster known for his agressive style, who used to say "There are two types of sacrifices: correct ones, and mine").
It's a psychological thing, very strong. If you succeed with it, it completely throws off opponents off of their feet. They go into certain brain rage mode, which does not understand "how did this happen", and begins a reasoning and calculation, which tends to last for a while, and it hurts their gameplay.

That is the reason Cypher, who is very calm and cool, said that "Evil destroyed quake for me", or something along those lines.

Whether QC has been figured out or not is irrelevant. Your previous main argument was that QC was somehow the next step which forced people to improve and adapt. Thats simply not true because of the sheer principles that have been dumbed down. Speedcap, lower item importance, press F for free damage / selfheal / wallhack / get out of jail free card. Theres less reward for skill and lower demands on players. You would make a point if this was Q4 and crouchsliding, but its not.

I used to think like this, like you, a few years ago, judging other games that I though had gone "to sh*t", comparing to previous series. However, those games really did go to the sh*tter, whilst QC is actually done quite masterfully. I'm currently in a conversation about this "adaptation thing" with Captain, read our discussion above. I really don't want to repeat.

"They’ve balanced the game with newcomers in mind" (c) Cypher, source:the article on this page.
But I wasnt talking about the pros. For them, the challenge is money, not the game. And with a million dollar prize pool, they already have their challenge.

That is true. But think about it yourself - what has been balanced towards the noobs ?

When I started learning this new QC game, I started noticing, that there are very few things that cater "to noobs". The most hateful thing, is probably the zoom damage. I don't like the duel format either. What else is to hate ? Would you please list a few things ?

I thought i was the only one here making parallels between chess and quake players)

http://esreality.com/post/2507372/what-chess-...-would-be/

Chess has a strong "russian school", and so does quake.
If it was year 1970 or something, we'd probably see Cypher/Cooller and others playing chess lol.

One funny thing about chess is that America has single geniuses that come forth only once in a while. They had Paul Morphy and Bobby Fischer, the latter one becoming a world champion.

While Russia has had it's great players on constant basis, there are/were quite a few of them.

Kind of reminds of quake as well, where America has 1 good player for 4-5 good euro-asian players.

Yeah, because we're a nation of mighty warriors and shit... But mainly thats cause of the hardcore climate and life in Russia overall. Theres not much to do outside when its freezing.

Chess was also so popular because it was a part of ideologies struggle ("Our way is better, comrrade, we have greater minds than them filthy murikans") and very cheap - a few dozens of chess-sets were all you needed to have the whole block having a good time. No need to build football fields n shit.

In advance; my goal is not to be rude or belittle your opinion, but after checking out some of your posts, I think you are either quite new to Quakes / scene or you are playing / speccing for years now, but just generally baffled in the topics at hand.


"But these guys at ID might have mathematicly counted everything out"

On the financial-side, for sure. )


About evil;
1) Yeah, he's an old player. Used the nick 'luc1fer' before 'evil'.
2) No, as puritan mentioned, he was one of the best russians even in the Q3 days and then he took a long break. After his comeback, he rose to prominence quite quickly, so he's anything but a slow learner.
3) His style is anything, but very tactical. He's known for his superb combat-skill, fearless lg charges and balls of steel in general.

At this point, your argument is basically countered on every front, since the very points you based it upon have been proven to be invalid.

Adaptation? Oh c'mon.. not counting the shitty visibility, sounds and hitboxes, the game is heaps easier (and dumber) than any Quake-title before; I have ~7000 hours of total Quake-time and 150+ QC matches to get to this conclusion. Well, I'm not a pro or anything, but certainly not a clueless shitter either, nor am I playing the game(s) for the monies / sponsors only, so I have religious confidence in this statement.


"And quake is a game for teenagers, basicly"

Actually not, quite the contrary rather. The average age of quakers are getting close to 30 these days and it's like that for a good reason. You know, the people who KNOW what they want and not really getting it for like 8 years now - this thing is sure more obvious since the beta launch.

The brain is acting like a sponge much earlier than 14-16 years of age btw. Don't confuse hand-eye coordination / motoric functions in general with this.

Also, I shine considerably brightly ->in Quake<- after turning 30 than how I did when I was a teenager. What this comes down to is that it depends on person.


"girls are most beautiful at that age, do you not agree"

That's already a bit old for me, but I guess each to his own. ))

I think you are either quite new to Quakes / scene or you are playing / speccing for years now, but just generally baffled in the topics at hand.

I played for years, specced for years, and I'm not baffled :)

"But these guys at ID might have mathematicly counted everything out"
On the financial-side, for sure. )

Imagine coming up with the concept of Quake Champions, from scratch to what it is now. Are you sure you'd come up with a mash of this kind of movement, health and armor balancing system ? Honestly.

So they've put a lot of thought into it, and trial-errored and counted a lot of factors in. That is my idea.

But the joke is good, I like it.

About evil;

Not gonna go personal or anything, but I used cyberfight.ru a lot back in the day, to watch team games, learn edges etc., and I remember Evil and Jibo, I think. It's a bit foggy, so thanks to you guys, who cleared things up on Evil.

His style is anything, but very tactical. He's known for his superb combat-skill, fearless lg charges and balls of steel in general.

Well, Cypher says he's tactical (and that is the person who played Evil the most), Evil himself calls it "tactical" gameplay, and I've heard other people call him that. And watching Evil play, it does seem like Evil thinks tactically more often than strategically. He likes to do things "when you don't expect" and often times challenges Cypher by dropping on his head in a 1v1 LG fight, which should be suicide for Evil, but he pulls it off.

I suggest consulting a dictionary what tactics and strategy is.

Adaptation? Oh c'mon.. not counting the shitty visibility, sounds and hitboxes, the game is heaps easier (and dumber) than any Quake-title before

It looks easier to you only because you've played those games before QC. If this was your first Arena First Peron Shooter, I don't think you'd be talking like that, had you met someone even half competent. Heck - you wouldn't know how to strafe jump. Think about it.

In general - yes, the game, according to it's own developers, should cater towards newcommers. However, when it is played at the highest level - it's like Quake Live again, only with new mechanics and all kinds of new additions, which bring chaos. Chaos is never easy to learn, and only the best can do it.

"And quake is a game for teenagers, basicly"

Actually not, quite the contrary rather. The average age of quakers are getting close to 30 these days and it's like that for a good reason. You know, the people who KNOW what they want and not really getting it for like 8 years now - this thing is sure more obvious since the beta launch.

So what you're saying is that your reflexes are getting better, as you grow old ?
Or that you're getting wiser, and map control is easier to you, because of your experience ?
Because it cannot be both.

Also, I shine considerably brightly ->in Quake<- after turning 30 than how I did when I was a teenager. What this comes down to is that it depends on person.

No, it does not depend on a person.
It's a very simple principle, and I've explained it earlier. If you choose not to open your mind to it, it's your choice.

But I'll give an example, of myself.
When I was 16, I used an mx510, with 800dpi (drivers), sensitivity 5 and mouse accel 1. Let that sink in for a minute. Or try it yourself.

It was hard to play with, but eventuall I mastered it, for a short period of time (like 2 years) (to be consistent with it, you have to train a lot). I did unbelievable shots with it, used to hit 60-80% rail on a mediocre day, 90%ish on instagib modes.

And I've come back to the whole thing in recent years. I couldn't make it work. The main reason was not that something changed in hardware, no, I re-made the setup 1-to-1 to what it used to be. The problem lies in the person, and it's age. With age we are wiser, have more thoughts, and have been in more situations, "to know better" how they end.

So instead of letting our aim carry us in pointless situations, we start choosing better positions and other tactical or even strategical stuff, so that we would not have to rely on our reflexes, because reflexes are not always dependable.

I am not sure how you managed to reach your age without making these conclusions. What can I say. Think deeper ?

I can already feel that this whole thing might be fruitless.)



"Imagine coming up with the concept of Quake Champions, from scratch to what it is now. Are you sure you'd come up with a mash of this kind of movement, health and armor balancing system ?"

I would come up with an actual Quake game and would try to make it a bit more successful basing it on the ACTUAL playerbase's (aka quakers) roots and not on the wish of attracting flocks of clueless casuals (who will leave soon anyways).

Basically an uber-configurable (with console ofc) Quake 3 Remaster with a new, much more responsive engine which looks 'decent' by today's mainstream standard, but the visuals are not one bit in the center, but the actual VQL (+CPM) physics, unlagged netcode and true positional audio are.
A lot of spectator / eSport-functions (maybe something like GTV even), ladders, super simple, but extensive menus, extensive server browser and demo tools, integrated glicko.

Q3's gothic biomechanical or Q1's Lovecraftian theme throughout, with the classic 9-weapon arsenal. And with classic game modes; FFA, TDM, CTF, duel. I would also include some 'fun' or even 'crazy' unranked modes like CA, Harvester etc. But the ranked core would be the Holy Quadruplet.

So a new Quake game, which is more extensive and 'beautiful' than ever before but stays 100% TRUE to the very essence - and not a MOBA-like, scrappy mess of foreign ideas and hats trying to appeal to everybody except the real would-be playerbase.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------


about evil: Heh, if you interpret it like that, everybody who's not playing like a lobotomized monkey is a 'tactical' player.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------


"It looks easier to you only because you've played those games before QC. If this was your first Arena First Peron Shooter, I don't think you'd be talking like that, had you met someone even half competent. Heck - you wouldn't know how to strafe jump. Think about it."

Yes, ofc. It's so obvious that it doesn't even worth including it in the debate.
But why the hell would I care about people who haven't played arena shooters before? There were already a plethora of such games and if anybody would have been truly interested in them, he / she would have already played it. They played other games because real arena shooters weren't meant for them and they knew it. Because these games are 'ruthless' and have no tolerance in general for the slightest of mistakes and just a pinch of difference in skill can manifest itself in big end score differences. Which is the way it meant to be. It was like that from the very beginning until now, and don't forget that these games are STILL getting played daily, even after 15-20 years of their launch. For a good reason.

If you are talking about the greatest legacy of the arena shooter genre and the daddy of e-Sports in general (grand daddy is DOOM), it's truly sad how the developers dumbing it down, ripping out a considerable chunk of basic concept and trying to sell out the end product wearing hats and helicopters to baffled potatoes.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------


"So what you're saying is that your reflexes are getting better, as you grow old ?
Or that you're getting wiser, and map control is easier to you, because of your experience ?"

None of the above. What I obviously say is that the WHOLE CONCEPT OF A TRUE QUAKE GAME (or essentially any hardcore skill-based arena FPS for that matter) is not for the teenagers of 2017.
I doubt that I have to elaborate on this further if you haven't lived in seclusion on a mountain in the last ~10 years or so.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------


"No, it does not depend on a person.
It's a very simple principle, and I've explained it earlier. If you choose not to open your mind to it, it's your choice."

Ok, yu konvinced me. )

For starters, I play Quakes since late '96 with some breaks here and there. Knowing this, please tell me how is that possible that I could shit on my teenage- (and even twenties-) plays now (in terms of raw aim / combat skill / reactions AND meta) with one hand while watching BBC on a second monitor? And I'm playing a rather aim-heavy game by the way.
Doesn't that mean I shine more brightly (aka I'm almost incomparably better now in every aspect of the game than I was) now? C'mon.
But I guess it doesn't depend on person..


---------------------------------------------------------------------------


"Think deeper ?"

: *

Was a good one.

tl;dr

xD

D E E P
E
E
P

Cypher obviously talking business but the game is just a piece of fucking crap and should not be called quake

rofl at "Say, against Agent, I can’t play without Visor at all; there’s no way I can win with anything else"
couldn't say better to pay homage to agent's wits :D

Yes. This surprised me. Maybe he play mind game some?

I say maybe partly mind game, because he say NO play anarki or sorlag. Could bring it out in surprise pick in tourney :D

Very insightful, solid introduction to QC.

Great read! :)

Nice interview ;)

no matter what they do to make things easier for noobs... everything they introduce can be used and abused by "pros" it really changes nothing but a bit of meta. noobs will still be noobs.

Well that's absurd. Saying it changes nothing but a bit of meta defines everything as meta, pretty much.

Even if something can be abused - it's the same for everyone, do not forget that.

So if 2 professionals are abusing something (let's say nyx's ability or visor's wh), it becomes an interesting mind game in itself, who is better at abusing that specific thing.

That's a depth inside a "simple" at first glance game. It's an addition to what quake used to be, and pros will have to develop new skillsets on top of old ones, to survive the competition - be it from q3, ql or q1 days.

Tim Willits had his wits about him, when he said "the best quaker still wins the day", which is exactly what I wrote above - the faster and better thinker wins.

"In Quake III, you respawn with a machine gun, 125 HP, and zero armor, and until you pick up a good gun and a more or less decent armor suit, you won’t be fragging anyone. "


Guy haven't played much TDM I guess. Or FFA for that matter.



No biggie. )

Yeah, but that MG is 4x10, not 8x10, or 9x13.3 in the case of the HMG.

It's quite a strong weapon in QC.

I know. Played 150ish QC games.

I think that's all he's really getting at.

The MG is too powerful IMO. But maybe it needs to be to make up for all these tanks spawning with a million health.

Haven't really thought about that in-depth, but that's an interesting point, by both cypher and you.

What I've noticed, is that I do often tend to pick HMG if I'm in that side of the map, it's almost like a priority. And it scares people away very fast.

It might be a little overpowered. If this gun becomes a habbit for good players, it will promote slow play, because everyone will get a new hobby of "soften them up before going to bed" across the map, which will lead skinny champions running away to pick up health and armor, in order to go back and re-engage elsewhere, which is a time waste.

This HMG change is quite annoying, when I tend to think about it. I now do remember a game against new people (low rank, probably from CSGO or COD), who were 2x Nyx players in a team (probably in a party, had similar names), who were using only HMG and SHOTGUNS. They were so annoying, it was unbelievable, I couldn't kill them fast enough with Scaler directly hitting them in the face, they would always out-damage me by softening me up and then shotguning me point blank. I would seriously hurt them, but couldn't get to them fast enough, leaving them with somethign like +12 hp (my guess).

So yeah. This will have to be looked into. It's even worse if people zoom :< That zoom mechanic...seriously. Jesus Christ, why did the even bother, they could've given us a taunt button instead of zoom.

Well, ye, it was obvious from the first ever QC game I played that mg / hmg is not just 'quite strong', but fuckin' OP, if you have better track aim than a potato.

What I was referring to was the bs, namely 'you won't be fragging anyone' with mg in QL.

"They’ve balanced the game with newcomers in mind. In Quake III, you respawn with a machine gun, 125 HP, and zero armor, and until you pick up a good gun and a more or less decent armor suit, you won’t be fragging anyone."

Crazy to see how far we've come. That 125 starting HP and machinegun in Q3 was an "answer" to Q2s getting railed off spawn with 100 HP and only starting with a Blaster!

(That post's not criticizing QC either, I don't care if QC adds abilities, if it adds/retains more players than QL or UT4 then I'm all for it)

I miss spawnfragging, that shit was hardcore to the bone. Once you got in the zone you were a completely spaced out fragging machine. Nothing comes close to the pure destruction you were able to dish out back then, +100 frags games in 10 mins.

Ah nostalgia...

They really need to drop the zoom extra dmg for hmg completely

Yup, and I think they will.
Now that it's only 10 damage the difference is kind of small, it also doesn't make sense that the gun would shoot harder zoomed in(rail is charged), it's the only weapon that does so = not intuitive or coherent, and it's just awkward.

It only increases the DPS by 5, from 120 to 125, and the damage of a single bullet from 9 to 10. It's insignificant.

It is totally weird that this even exists.

How many bullets does it fire per second?

75ms reload normally (13.333... bullets per second) or 80ms when zoomed (12.5 bullets per second).

They even talked about changing this, but it is unlikely to happen before the tournament.

Source: http://www.esreality.com/post/2873836/ask-the-devs-answers/

Well, I was wrong. They've nerfed it before the tournament.

http://www.esreality.com/post/2877938/patch-n...27-update/

Heavy Machinegun: Changed damage from 9 to 10, but decreased the rate of fire from 75 to 100, resulting in a decrease of 120 to 100 dps
Heavy Machinegun (zoomed): Changed damage from 12 to 15, but with a greatly decreased rate of fire from 80 to 200 ms, resulting in a decrease of 150 to 75 dps, but with a much smaller more accurate spread. In summary: Zoomed HMG now does less dps, but is very accurate, making it less than ideal in the beginning of a fight, but great for finishing off weak opponents.

Oh nice thanks for the info. Those changes sound pretty good to me. I haven't actually played in a few weeks, I had no idea they were gearing towards a change like that. That should have been the settings from the start if they were doing different zoom damage :P easy to sit back and criticize with 2020 hindsight though.

No problem. I think this HMG will be better too. :D

im playing paladins, the problem with quake is only one
MATCHMAKING
thats it
if they fix that it can work
but really
in paladins i can see it clearly, when playing alone trying some new heroe, opponents sucks
then leveled and with friend opponents are picked a lot hard,

No-one this week was as interesting to watch as Cypher the week before!

Four minutes in the duel queue. That's a new high... or low. Not sure how to put it. English isn't my first language, you know

Happy you put your best knowledge of English into making that lovely name :D

It's just something is misheard back in the Blood days. Man, I loved that game. CTF was amazing

Misheard?

The announcer in Blood definitely says "Anal Justice!"

It was great. :D

Speaking of which - are we getting a new announcer on QC ?

I recall SyncError or someone saying there was another announcer coming, which would be the third one, right?

Who's the second one then :D

The current one.

They had some different announcer in the trailers and videos going out in the beginning if I recall correctly.

But I LOVE the current announcer. Not sure why people hate. It's best one I've ever heard. You people need to change your drugs. Or start taking some if you haven't done so already.