[FEEDBACK] Disruptor Nerf

[Scheveningen]

Rather than being incendiary I'll be constructive about my findings.

At present I've found that disruptors being adjusted the way they are has led to some frustrating circumstances where perfect accuracy magdumps doesn't even down the suspect, even if unarmored. I've found the old strategy of "shoot+hit once, approach and rush with baton to finish" is now the most effective method, again. Personally I feel with this method there's far less counterplay involved if the user is conscious that this is the only standard method that will work to secure an arrest, barring usage of specialized equipment like flashbangs or pepperspray, grenade or otherwise.

I naturally understand the desire to not permit security officers to be able to 1v1 any antagonist with a general-purpose pistol that melts if in the rare circumstance it is allowed to be set to lethal, and otherwise is likely to render them unconscious if its on stun setting. But I think shooting the equivalent of energy BBs makes using the gun fairly lame and it results in the .45 pistols being cracked out from the armory early - which no matter what the antag does is gonna not only hit like a truck each shot, but has a high chance of incurring heart-shots. (with 25-30 brute damage this is almost certainly a lethal blow that will cause death in 2 minutes, and you'll be unconscious within 15 seconds when it happens, speaking as someone with experience in dealing with lucky changeling armblade hits as medical.)

I'm not going to suggest that antagonists should just "get good" or "don't get hit" or any other unhelpful or unrealistic advice for the most part. I'd rather suggest to take the middle ground of the pre-nerf stats and the post-nerf stats. Add min + max, divide by two, acquire the mean, and it should work in terms of average damage per shot as well as overall damage output/potential. The disruptors were a bit too strong before, now they tickle people. I'd rather they just be mediocre but still fairly dangerous if unrespected instead, similar to butterfly knives.

While unrelated to disruptors at large I believe antagonists need more tools in terms of defensive safety nets to keep them alive, since I don't think crew players or antag players like the idea of wave-based antag respawns as much as they do like to have strong antagonists that take significant team efforts to take down. In the same vein I think everyone would hate damage sponges too, but I'd like to see incentive for security and the main antagonists of the round to try to outsmart each other rather than just trying to statcheck each other.

Edited January 7, 2021 by Scheveningen

[geeves]

Made a PR to attempt to find the middle ground.

* Disruptor firerate has been increased back to 0.6s, up from 0.8s.
* Mini-disruptors now have 6 shots, up from 5.
* Disruptor stun shots now do 30 agony damage, up from 25.

https://github.com/Aurorastation/Aurora.3/pull/10934

 

Values are not final and set in stone until the PR is merged.

[Skull132]

Can someone explain something for me, real quick. When reading feedback, I see that some of it is positive and falls straight into the spot we want to hit:

On 07/01/2021 at 15:08, Vulcenus said:

So, I had the chance to use the disruptor and have it used on me after the nerf this past few days. I'll start with a positive note by saying that the disruptor nerf actually made me more careful in dangerous situations and actually consider engaging in a fight rather than pulling out my disruptor and chasing people like rabid dogs, because let's face it, disruptors were actually pretty decent before the nerf and unless you were facing a group of armed individuals, resulted in a clean cut victory for the security officer(s).

I can summarize this as follows:

• Security now has to pay more attention to even unarmored combatants (provided that security themselves aren't armed with high alert level gear). This is arguably a positive change, as a good deal of antagonists, specially in the beginning of a round, are themselves unarmored. Also, making way for lesser crimes to be viable again without a 100% "You're fucked" rate upon being sighted by security might actually encourage antagonists to not arm up immediately.
• Security is now, in general, more considerate towards combat. Which should make engagements with antagonists in general be more interesting, as security should be looking out for their own lives as well.

Both of these sound like great, positive points from an overall gameplay perspective.

But them we follow it up with this:

On 07/01/2021 at 15:08, Vulcenus said:

But at the current state, I think you might as well remove the disruptor entirely given that you're not able to stop or slown down an unarmored individual effectively (Read: Won't be able to, you're better off tackling the guy you're duking out with a stunbaton). I would suggest re-instating the .45 pistols back for the officer sidearms but given the attitude towards Security and their equipment on this server after a few successful rounds of dumb antagonists acting careless and getting curbed in 10 minutes because they couldn't read the room and failed to act accordingly, there's a high chance it would end up with a nerf for the .45 pistols as well, so I would rather not see them outside the Armory for the time being.

So we can agree that the nerfs are pointing us in the right direction (sans tackle-hugging*). But then we swing to either an extreme of "Bring back the .45s" or "Just remove everything"? Why exactly is this? Generally speaking, considering the overall protection security has on the station, them not being able to solo actively resistant people without being careful might be a good thing? You typically have one of the better staffed departments, along with the AI and the rest of the crew to help you locate and snoop out the guy who's causing trouble. Making intended confrontations more tactically interesting seems like an overall plus.

* If one balance change reveals another mechanic in need of balancing, then such is life. It ain't always a valid argument against the original change.

[Vulcenus]

2 hours ago, Skull132 said:

snip

So, my problem isn't the fact that lone unarmored combatants are now posing an actual threat or actually have a standing chance against security officers. As you said so yourself, this is a positive change for the good of the round progression. But while you're increasing the lone combatant's survivability, you're making the opposite side entirely useless in a one on one scenario, and giving a major handicap on the Security side on two on one scenarios, and if the antagonist is actually smart, they can easily outrun and outmaneuver officers in a four on one scenario which I've done not more than a day ago. (They had access to armors and Armory equipment, as well).

The disruptors currently give the officer a false sense of security with the promise that it will actually do something against the combatant you're facing, which isn't true. Like I mentioned in my initial feedback, I don't think we should bring back .45s, because they'll end up being nerfed to the ground because they are now the standard starting equipment of officers. Removing disruptors without swapping them with another alternative isn't removing everything, since the .45s will still be in the Armory. By removing the disruptor, the security officer will and should flee when they're facing an armed combatant, instead of standing their ground with a firearm that is practically as useful as a banana in their holster. Which is, from my understanding, what we both want with these nerfs.

TL;DR: Disruptors are currently literally useless, so there's no reason to keep them. Remove disruptors, so you don't have to deal with the hypocrisy of "balance" and so the officers will opt out to flee the scene when they encounter an armed combatant and arm up in the Armory instead of standing their ground with their pants down. Win/Win

Edited January 9, 2021 by Vulcenus

[Scheveningen]

Just now, Vulcenus said:

currently literally useless

which is why they're being buffed up again, hence the point of feedback suggestions. Good feedback courtesy is to contribute in such a way that "removal" is not part of the formulated answer. The developers have proven they want to keep disruptors as they fulfill the vision of what intends to be accomplished. It is unlikely this will change.

[Vulcenus]

I know they're currently being bumped up one click from being useless, I'm just explaining to Skull why I said what I said. I don't see a difference between making an item completely useless and removing them, which is the reason I offered the option in the first place. There's no reason to keep an item if it isn't viable to use them. Like I mentioned in my initial post, I agree the disruptors were pretty powerful before the nerf, but the first step into a nerf shouldn't be making them completely uneffective.

I think the problem lies in the fact that as long as Security is able to pacify an antagonist, there will always be someone complaining about the usefulness of an equipment. So once we balance disruptors again, an antagonist who was apprehended by the examplary use of a disruptor pistol will again start complaining, which will result in another nerf that will leave the disruptors in rock bottom. So you might as well cut the middle man and leave security officers with stunbatons and pepper sprays for their standard equipment.

This way the round and antagonist's survival longevity will improve as the Security will be busy longer trying to break into their own Armory to grab something to use against the armed individuals, which I think will make everyone happy, except the Security Department, of course

Edited January 9, 2021 by Vulcenus

[Scheveningen]

Just now, Vulcenus said:

I think the problem lies in the fact that as long as Security is able to pacify an antagonist, there will always be someone complaining about the usefulness of an equipment. So once we balance disruptors again, an antagonist who was apprehended by the examplary use of a disruptor pistol will again start complaining, which will result in another nerf that will leave the disruptors in rock bottom. So you might as well cut the middle man and leave security officers with stunbatons and pepper sprays for their standard equipment. 

The odds of this occurring are low considering the point of balancing is to try to find the acceptable medium until a majority of people stop complaining for/against it. This is basically an active service, and it is difficult to test average DPS in a vacuum.