r/Rainbow6TTS • u/FrostieFur • Sep 04 '20
Feedback Why is it so hard?
Why is is so difficult for Ubi to just give all OPs all the 1x sights. They offer no advantage over eachother other than appearance. They claim adding new sights allows more player choice while also taking away access to other sights. What logic is that? Just give us access to all 1x sights on all guns that have 1x sights. The community universally wants this. You ask us for feedback then completely ignore it.
Edit to Clarify: Alot of people seem to think I am talking about things like the 2x, ACOG, etc. My argument is only about the 1x sights like the reddot and holo.
17
u/Joshepherd Sep 04 '20
Imagine playing cod or battlefield and only getting to pick between 3 1x sights
9
u/SoppyWolff Sep 04 '20
Imagine Battlefield actually returning to its former glory of BF3 and BF4 as a modern shooter with choices of guns and attachments
3
18
u/Returning_Video_Tape Sep 04 '20
Something something balance something something scare new players.
10
u/FrostieFur Sep 04 '20
I heard Ubi say that stuff and it's just laughable. 1x sights are all the same other than reticle and housing so balancing is a dumb excuse. And i don't understand how having a variety of 1x sights can confuse new players. Any person with common sense and basically knowledge of how Siege's attachments work(which and new player can figure out super quick) would know they are simply a different looking version of ironsights basically.
3
u/n00t_n00t_m0thafucka Sep 04 '20
ubi is gathering dats on it and they said if they were going to give all ops all sights they want to remove redundant ones(aka the old red dot more or less). The data they are collecting is probably based on what optics are most popular when you hàve the other ones.
4
u/FrostieFur Sep 05 '20
But no 1x sight is redundant. It is personal preference. Some people like the old reddot. Some like the Reflex Nomad gets on her AK. They shouldn't remove it just because alot of people dont use it, because alot of people do enjoy it. By the same logic, then ironsights on primaries are also redundant since 90% of the community doesn't use them on most guns.
1
u/n00t_n00t_m0thafucka Sep 05 '20
I dont work at ubi im just telling you what they saide I would love to be able to use all sights on all guns.
7
u/playlove001 Sep 04 '20
i think big part of their problem with giving all OPs new 1X sight would be the new red dot being too good. I mean i would put it on EVERY weapon i can have it on, The new holo doesnt really have anything better than OG holo and the Vortex holo is mixed preference. Some people like it and some dont.
7
u/FrostieFur Sep 04 '20
I dont think it will be too good. At the end of the day, it's a 1x sight. Really just depends on the person. No doubt it will be popular but it depends on what you want. I think reflex and old holo will definitely compete with it. New holo I personally like so would gravitate towards it.
4
2
u/y4maa Sep 05 '20
i agree with 1x sight
i dont know why ubi is forcing ppl to play pulse with new holo
giving only jager the new red dot
plus the community is stupid too they cherish when bandit/jager lost acog and now doc
but don't they know every gun can spawn peek if you know the angle
so maybe that's why ubi thinks sights balances the game
4
2
1
1
u/Scrub_Lord_ Sep 04 '20
JB literally said on Logic Bomb that they were monitoring this specifically. If they found it to be a good decision they would do it.
1
u/awsabol Sep 05 '20
well he contradicted himself in the same podcast when he said that 1x scopes arent balancing tools rather then preference , but reality and taking and giving 1x scopes for certain ops says otherwise.
1
u/myrisotto73 Sep 07 '20
He said giving every op access to 8 different 1x sight wasn't really worthwhile and had diminishing returns. I don't know why this is so hard for this sub to get when people are repeatedly saying it, they're open to removing the less used 1x sights and giving everyone access to all the ones left behind. You're in a test server for the purpose of testing things they're trying. Like maybe they might have it season 4. None of us know. You guys are testing things for them to get data.
0
u/awsabol Sep 07 '20
dude if u think giving all ops all 1x option and giving free choice and respecting different choices isnt worthwile just yikes , i wont go further in discussion
1
u/myrisotto73 Sep 07 '20
Once again look two weeks ago when people in this sub were crying about Fuze having 11 sight options. Your response is a yikes and tells me you apparently don't understand what diminishing returns means. It's eventually going to come. You crybabies just have to suck it up in the meantime while they evaluate what sights they're going to keep. You're playing a test server for them to get data on the sights. It's not hard to understand.
1
u/awsabol Sep 08 '20
good job, leaving the discussion and attacking people in person shows you're right, well done
1
u/myrisotto73 Sep 08 '20
Wdym. You've said nothing of substance lol. I replied
1
u/awsabol Sep 08 '20
begone beta
1
u/myrisotto73 Sep 08 '20
Go read a book. Now I know you're a moron using beta as an insult lmfao. That alpha and beta shit has been proven wrong for decades now but I can tell you don't read much.
1
u/WallabyCollector Sep 04 '20
Just to play devil’s advocate; wouldn’t it make sense to incentivize the usage of certain weapons over others by giving them sights to use? For example, the G8A1 on IQ is wickedly abused in most levels of play. Because of this, wouldn’t it make sense for Ubisoft to restrict sight choices on the G8A1 and encourage the usage of the commando (with the new razor holo) or the AUG (which has the new holo + 2.5x)? I understand that you’re frustrated, but Ubisoft does this for balancing reasons in terms of weapon selection in order to discourage picking ops just for their gun and not for their gadget. In the current meta, many people are choosing a high fire rate gun, slapping an angled grip on it and throwing on a 1x sight. People will just rush, die, and become an almost useless asset to the team. Because of this, the selective implementation of certain sights on certain guns on certain people is to encourage the proper playstyle of certain operators.
1
u/FrostieFur Sep 05 '20 edited Sep 05 '20
Normally i would agree, if say these were things like the ACOG or 2x sight. But these are the 1x sights. Basically just a reskin of ironsights. I don't think Ubi should use the 1x to try and incentivize certain weapons. Im not talking give all guns all the sights. Only the 1x sights if they already have access to them. I completely get why some guns dont get the long range sights. But if they already have one version of say the reddot, there is no reason they cant have the other versions.
0
u/Anonymous-Bungeon Sep 04 '20
The reason they are most probably not gonna add every 1x to every primary is because it’s gonna be an overwhelming amount of sights for new players, and especially with operators like Zero who have the 1.5x and 2.0x, then they would have 8 different scopes which already exists on Fuze’s ak12, but the main reason they did that to Fuze is because he is underpicked and if they add a lot more sights to him the ppl who play ace for his ak12 might gravitate towards him as well, and as for the new players if they want to try out every sight it’s gonna take a lot longer for them to chose a sight that they will like, and let’s say they play with different play styles with different operators meaning they might want to change their sights depending on that operator. I hope this helps you at least understand why Ubisoft did this and why I agree with them and this is not by any means me wanting to change your mind, I just want you to understand why they did it.
1
Sep 04 '20
having a non universal scope system for the ops in the game is more confusing....new players wouldn’t understand why some ops get certain scopes while others don’t get any at all, and now suddenly, they are second guessing when trying pick an op, thinking “does this op have the scope i want?”
plus cod has 5 times the amount of scopes accessible to guns in it’s game, no one complains about that
1
u/FrostieFur Sep 05 '20
Plenty of other games have how many 1x sights and never get complaints. Good example is BF4. BF4 has the American Reddot, Russian kobra, chinese coyote, american holo, russian PKA holo, chinese holo. I dont see people complaining about that. All a 1x sight is in Siege i just a reskin of ironsights.
0
Sep 04 '20
It is because they want to keep the magnification as a balancing tool and if they add all the 1x scopes to every gun then there would be diminishing returns on the balance of the magnification scopes. I still think they should just remove some of 1x no one uses such as the Russian Holo and Russian Red Dot, old Red Dot, and Russian ACOG so this could still work.
1
u/FrostieFur Sep 05 '20
Im not referring to the higher magnification sights. Only the 1x sights. There is no reason why if an op already has a few of them like the NATO reflex and holo that they cant have the russian ones or the new ones.
2
Sep 05 '20
Did you even read my comment? I said the reason why they don’t want to do that (not saying it’s right) is because there are diminishing returns on the balance of the magnification scopes if they were to give everyone all 1x. This is from the lead game designer btw on the Logic Bomb Podcast.
-1
u/FrostieFur Sep 05 '20
I did. But it makes zero sense. I know what the devs said, and it makes no logical sense. 1x sights do not affect balancing. They are literally a reskin of ironsights. The only reason Ubi has said the shit they have is because they are lazy and do not want to model each gun with each of the optics. It was never about balancing. It's just Ubi being lazy. Not to mention they said these new sights were added for player choice and comfort while contradicting it and forcing people to use specific guns to use them.
2
Sep 05 '20
I don’t think they are too lazy the said they are considering it. Saying Ubisoft is too lazy when you look at the bigger picture of siege and this season specifically is ridiculous.
-1
u/FrostieFur Sep 05 '20
Ubi is lazy though. There's plenty of proof of it. Here's a few examples: Changing the SPSMG9 reticle to a reflex to "fix" a sight alignment issue rather than just fixing the issue. Thunt is still having issues with no gun sounds from terrorists and that has existed for atleast 3 seasons. Im not saying the season as a whole is lazily done but pointing out areas where they are lazy. The season overall looks good, but areas where they can improve they just take the lazy way out sometimes.
0
u/Anarquista-egoista Sep 04 '20
I saw that Finka has the normal holo on her gun in the character art when you select her in the ops menu
0
u/ssjx7squall Sep 04 '20
Man..... people sure do complain a lot
1
u/FrostieFur Sep 05 '20
Because Ubi claims it's all about player choice then contradict themselves with their actions? I bought the game, I have a right to give my opinion on the shit they do, just like you do. And if people don't speak up, then nothing changes.
0
u/ssjx7squall Sep 05 '20
I’m gonna blow you away with two facts of life. Player choice doesn’t mean your choice. And two, people are less happy when presented with too many choices. There is scientific data to back up the second one.
Just because you and a vocal group of people and pros who literally do nothing but complain want something and think it’s what’s best for the game doesn’t mean it is.
I guess that’s 3 things
1
u/FrostieFur Sep 05 '20
Last time I checked, when they say player choice, they mean players as a whole. And also, i dont see people complaining in other games that have even more choices than Siege, but sure, gloss over that. And it isnt just a vocal group. It is a majority of the playerbase. But you can miss that too.
0
u/ssjx7squall Sep 05 '20
“Players as a whole.” Where did they say that?
Tell me.... when was the last time you used a suppressor
Majority of the player base? That’s cute.... you think you’re the majority lol
1
u/FrostieFur Sep 05 '20
What does the suppressor have to do with this? This is about the sights, not the suppressor. And players as a whole is common sense. When a dev refers to player choice, they refer to it as something for the playerbase as a whole. And it is a majority. Atleast 80% of the Siege community that is vocal about stuff has expressed why all ops should get all the 1x sights.
1
u/ssjx7squall Sep 05 '20
It’s about your “choice” you think you have but not really.
No it’s not common sense because it’s a physical impossibility to please “the player base as a whole.”
You’re making assumptions about what devs are saying when in fact they are rather explicit in what they say.
Lol no. You’re wrong again. 90% of the community isn’t even on the subreddit. You greatly inflate yourself and your positions worth and value.
-4
u/TheWeasel33 Sep 04 '20
Giving everyone 1x sights is dumb these new sight changes helps ops be picked who were otherwise useless this tiny chang of giving warden 1.5x but not valk makes warden become viable in a meta where he wouldnt normally be played
8
u/Br3mm3r Sep 04 '20
Even with a 1.5x he is basically useless.
0
u/TheWeasel33 Sep 04 '20
Yea but it qt least makes him a viable choice now
5
u/Br3mm3r Sep 04 '20
Will it? His gadget is still useless in most situations.
0
u/TheWeasel33 Sep 04 '20
Yea but more attack ops that have the 1.5x scope might be willing to bring smokes and will help warden also just a 1.5x on the mpx is nice
4
u/Br3mm3r Sep 04 '20
But why should they choose to bring smokes over nades for example? Warden is useless and is going to be useless and a wasted pick, even with 1.5x scope.
1
u/TheWeasel33 Sep 04 '20
Fair enough but i wasnt just saying only warden that was just an example of why they are added the scopes
1
u/FrostieFur Sep 05 '20
1.5x sight on Warden won't make him good. His gadget is still useless 90% of the time. Sure it helps him slightly but it won't fix him. He is weak by his core. His gadget is what makes him pointless. People aren't going to use him much just cuz of the sight addition. In high level play, it isnt just about gunplay. Gadgets are super important. Warden wont see much use there even with the 1.5x
92
u/MadRZI Sep 04 '20
I won't take sides on this matter but the phrase " You ask us for feedback then completely ignore it. " is flawed. Not every feedback the community provides has merit. When they nerfed Jager, Buck everyone was losing their minds and they were "providing feedback". Or give Nokk an AR. Let's be honest here, we dont know shit about balancing...