again all servers empty...

(INF3RN0) #61

The biggest thing is that yes… DB get’s very boring quick. Some people like overly simplified games for comp because they work right away or pubbers who only want to frag and not really work for anything, but there’s a point where just shooting people with guns that essentially all function the same way get’s BORING AS HELL. I greatly enjoyed the variety that was put into W:ET and ETQW and yea they were bumpy and annoying at first, but we adapted ourselves and the rough spots got smoothed out. That’s why I really want to test things that expand on the game play in general by being new or different or just overall improvements. CS, Quake, and ET all had way more going on in the meta game, which is probably more of the reason that they were played so long- because no two games ever felt similar. You don’t need comp or money tournaments to keep those games alive because people genuinely enjoy them without any incentive than just to play. When it takes 5-10 years for people to move on from a game, you know you did something right.

Everything can be accessible to all, but I want the potential to work towards something. For example; maybe it’s really easy to perform movements in game, but it’s hard to chain them together to successfully trick jump. Maybe you can kill a few people with just body shots and moderate aim, but then you can kill people very quick with perfect head tracking. Then there’s the long list of things that detract from smart individual and team plays (spawn timers, linear maps, lack of real forward spawns, no side objs, RoF, etc) really feeling significant. It’s just that right now the only thing to really do in DB is practice your aim and hope someone does the objective so you can go to the next one. The shooting portion is nice and important to the overall scheme yea, but I want moarrrrrrr icing on my cake :wink:.

(Kendle) #62

I hear that, because I’m usually the someone doing the objective while everyone else is off practising their aim. :frowning:

(Ashog) #63

[QUOTE=Anti;443686]Out of interest, of those of you struggling to find some ‘stickiness’ to DBs game play, despite enjoying the weapons now, do any of you still actively play games like ETQW, RTCW or W:ET on publics?

Just curious :)[/QUOTE]

I am often still playing ETQW on pub, especially custom maps. There’s going to be a new promod cup soon, hope to jump the train there too.

I will mostly agree with Inferno and Kendle about the reasons DB isn’t sticky for me anymore. I am having a problem posting feedback much anymore because of the threads spammed with long discussions and arguing between the few very vocal people here, who obviously lack the laconic self-expression skills, resulting in people like me having to read through whole of the mess and remember the posts in order to provide valuable response. But I have to try in this thread because it seems very important.

First of all, on contrary to Kendle’s opinion (which I respect and understand), what has put me off after last 2 patches is the gunplay. It has drastically changed towards the meatgrinder’s low TTK which I hate from BF and CoD games. This has never been a part of SD games, and even RTCW, though having almost a similar TTK, didn’t play the way DB does now. RTCW was somehow much more entertaining and yielding. The current RoF/TTK has made my playing DB a very boring a task. Even though I get satisfaction of killing 1-2 persons per life, overall it feels very chaotic and random, the lives are too short and meaningless, where you don’t get a feeling you have achieved something useful for the team alone based on your skill. The gameplay basically comes to overwhelming the enemy by numbers locally by luck of the short spawn times or other unpredictable factors.There’s no RTCW-style tactics or multikill skills involved, they are mostly meaningless and it’s just basically a fast-spawn quick meatgrinder like most of modern shooters, even objective play isn’t helping much.

Now one can analyze why that is for ages and everyone would find different subjective reasons, but some of the main factors as I see are the above mentioned items like:

[ul]
[li]too short TTK and firefights (due to too high RoF?)[/li][li]too short spawn times[/li][li]restricted movement[/li][li]wrong placement of some objectives/deliverables[/li][li]lack of interesting and useful secondary map objectives[/li][li]absense of proper capturable spawn points[/li][li]shortage of unique class features (see ETQWs tactical variety)[/li][/ul]

, accompanied by a lack of ETQW-like brilliant HUD features and Brink-like story (which is still coming, I know).

But the major one is as said before the gunplay. For me it has been destroyed by the previous patch, successfully removing the long firefights and combat movement features.

I will probably remember some more, but that’s surely enough for the time being.

(Ruben0s) #64

And I don’t feel like playing the objective, because it doesn’t feel rewarding at all.

Why don’t we have the freedom to place the c4 where we want? Escorting the EV is boring as … Playing the objective feels like pushing one button, one of the things I didn’t like about Brink, but we somehow need them because the average players has, according to SD, the brain of a peanutshell.

Samething with spawns. Spawns are so close to the place where the action is, so noobs won’t get lost. But now maps feel “cramped”. Just take the spawn points from goldrush and put them in LB. And lets see which spawns points feels better.

@anti , I don’t play those games actively anymore, I did some years ago.

(Anti) #65

[QUOTE=Ruben0s;443751]And I don’t feel like playing the objective, because it doesn’t feel rewarding at all.

Why don’t we have the freedom to place the c4 where we want? Escorting the EV is boring as … Playing the objective feels like pushing one button, one of the things I didn’t like about Brink, but we somehow need them because the average players has, according to SD, the brain of a peanutshell.
[/QUOTE]

What objectives from our previous titles did you like? The difference in interactions in DB to say W:ET or ETQW seem very, very small to me. I can understanding why timing issues might make objective completion less fun now than in previous games, that’s something we can work on, but making the act of placing the bomb itself more fun is one I struggle to see as a major issue.

(Kl3ppy) #66

[QUOTE=Anti;443686]Out of interest, of those of you struggling to find some ‘stickiness’ to DBs game play, despite enjoying the weapons now, do any of you still actively play games like ETQW, RTCW or W:ET on publics?

Just curious :)[/QUOTE]

No, i dont play etqw on a daily basis anymore but I played ETQW from 2007 till the end of 2012/beginning of 2013 and from time to time I play at the nirvana sunday party.

(Kl3ppy) #67

There is imo nothing wrong with the objective type. But what is wrong is that you just have 2-3 ways to the objective. In ETQW you had at least 2-3 ways to the objective due to the big maps, even indoors you had more ways (Area 21, Salvage, Volcano). And the maps in DB are just too small with just a limited ways/routes and this bores me very fast. The carryable stages are not nice. I think that Island at ETQW showed how to create a transmit stage. GDF is closer to the pick up place and Strogg is closer to the transmit place. This creates intense battles between the 2 places, right now you just have to pick the object and run away and you can easily transmit it because the defenders have almost no chance to get it back.

(iwound) #68

i think part of that is due to the game not reporting who achieved the objective.
earlier in the alpha some of us said we didnt need the constant announcements of who was doing what.
some were removed and then who completed them was removed.
i still think that the completed objective should globally announce who completed it with even maybe what xp they got for achieving it.
we dont need repairing announcments or planting (just a c4 has been planted but not who) or defusing (just defused no name) or pick up or drop off or PDAing.
but on completion the track was switched by …,…,… or the cores were delivered by …,…,… or the target was destroyed by …,…,…

as its the end of an objective the announcements won’t interfere with play but rather divide the map better.
there are still little text announcements during play we dont need and can have audible ones instead.

but i am missing the banter of well done …, now lets move on. it feels more like a continual grind because we dont have clear defintion between stages.
with text announcements all over, one moment feels like the next.
would it not be better to create a feeling of chapters.
you get the begin and do this announce. then at completion an announce saying these did it, now do this.
but during play keep it to a bare minimum.

area21 = 2
salvage = 2 plus the crawl space.
volcano = 2

(Kendle) #69

As you say, RTCW had a low TTK, so I don’t think it’s that which makes it a meat-grinder, or is contrary to a good objective game. I think there are 2 key differences in DB which may contribute to the feeling that the TTK is too low, when in fact it may not be.

  1. Spawn times.

Short spawn times mean you’re back in the action, and getting killed again, much sooner after the last time you died, leading to the impression you’re getting killed quicker. It could be you’re simply dying more often, rather than dying faster. Certainly for me this adds to the feeling of chaos and randomness, and is the main cause of the meat-grinder effect.

  1. Lack of multi-kills.

For some reason, despite having fairly terrible aim, even I could chain together 2 or 3 kills, per clip, in RTCW. In DB getting 2 kills per clip is rare, and even getting 2 kills per life is a struggle. Generally, if I beat the 1st guy I meet I die to the 2nd because I’m reloading, plus there are some very good aimers in the Alpha and some of them I just cannot beat, at all, ever.

If there was a (much) larger player base, consisting of many more players of my skill level, I think I would perform much better, and consequently not die so much, or as often, and so lead to the impression the TTK is not as short as I thought it was.

This is not to say you’re wrong, or deluded, but these could be contributory factors as to why the TTK feels too short.

To combat this I can only suggest increasing the spawn time (let’s bump it up to 20s just to test, for example), plus maybe a few minor tweaks to the guns, not necessarily to increase the TTK across the board but to make it so a shorter TTK can only be achieved if you work for it. In particular I used to crouch and burst fire a lot in RTCW. In DB neither seems to make much difference. I’ll leave it to wiser heads than mine how best to achieve that, I just don’t want to return to the ET style side-stepping tap-dance go make a coffee while you’re waiting for the fight to end scenario we had a few patches ago. :slight_smile:

(Kendle) #70

There’s nothing wrong with the objectives, I’m more than happy to drive / escort the EV, plant C4, defuse C4, do whatever needs to be done. I often just play the objective and end up with a K/D of 5/30 or something stupid.

The biggest problem I have with any objective is C4 at the moment. A little anecdote to illustrate …

Last nigh on Waterloo on the attacking team we struggled to get past the wall. Getting there was difficult, but once we did getting the C4 to blow was almost impossible. We once got 3 players to the wall, got a plant down, killed a couple of Engies who came to defuse, but due to the long fuse and short spawn those same Engies came back for a 2nd attempt, and together with a couple of team-mates killed all of us and got the defuse.

It’s soul destroying to spend 5 minutes fighting your way to the plant area, eventually get the plant down, defend it heroically against a wave of defenders, and still come away empty handed because the game does everything in its power to help the defending team.

(INF3RN0) #71

Firstly the maps are ultimately spawn->choke->obj. I find most maps to be pretty quick travel times to the obj compared to ETQW, but for those parts that are a bit longer you just end up not using half of the map (Brink) because (1) no forward spawns - WL forward is in a poor location (2) fast spawn times (3) no where for defense to setup beyond the objective area itself. The best maps in my opinion go spawn->choke->forward spawn->choke->choke->obj. The forward spawn is usually easy enough for the offense to capture, but you at least fight over it for a wave or two, and then defense always has the incentive to try and retake it. I feel like the forward spawn got removed because it seemed like just an extra obj, but because of it’s dynamic function during the whole game it’s definitely not. These choke points don’t need to be that far apart and they become consecutively more defensively biased, but having them work like this completely prevents forced repetition and strategy. The 2nd obj of Camden and the 1st obj of Waterloo are some of the only map sections that actually have more than one choke point before the objective that receive equal use (though even then it’s pushing it). If you want my best example of a map that I think should be the inspiration for future layouts it would be ETQW Volcano- mainly because every square inch of the map surrounding the objective got used in competition and pubs alike.

Class specific side objs give class roles more significance and meaning, and then making a dynamic connection with the opposing team furthers this. Do you choose to run a covert to hack a door or an engineer to build a bridge? And vice versa do you run a covert to unhack that door or a soldier to blow that bridge? Classes become conscious decisions that go beyond the basic abilities and side tasks ultimately increase the success rate of the completion of the main obj when they have influence over map flow. Well placed side objs in general can make maps way more fun and interesting. Preferably you always have a direct route to the obj itself, but side objectives can offer a means of a making it easier for offense or defense by simply increasing or reducing routes/chokes or in a lot of other creative ways.

I’d also like to see more interesting team roles presented by some of the “obj only” classes. I prefer non-forced class interaction myself, which is why I think all classes could use some equally attractive perks for their team (and I don’t mean buffs). Some of this already seems to be in the works, so I’m interested to see what we get there.

Doc run objs need a serious overhaul. Right now they aren’t doc runs, but doc captures or doc transmits. It needs to be both capturing and transmitting together- been discussed enough. Main objectives are mostly flat objects. Some are more interesting to complete than others solely because they let you interact with them more freely and intuitively. Being able to plant on a flat vertical wall vs an octagonal or square obj, etc can be a vastly different experience and when you do plant you usually pick a certain spot for a reason. The rest of the problems I see with the objectives is a combination of map layouts and spawn times. You definitely feel like the objs get completed by lemmings or just luck for the most part, and not much aside from killing as many people as you can seems to play an important role in the outcome of matches.

Most all of this has already been discussed so I feel a bit irked for repeating myself. What I will say is that whatever ideas you have for increasing the complexity of the meta, don’t hesitate to test it. The biggest attraction of your games is the fact that you can play for 5 years straight and never have the same play experience because every single aspect encourages player freedom and there’s tons of potential choices to make and methods of play. That went for comp as well, because you never had two teams using identical strategies and just relying on aim superiority to win (though you could do that when you were playing easy bots), because there was no true “best” way to play.

(Protekt1) #72

[QUOTE=Kendle;443763]There’s nothing wrong with the objectives, I’m more than happy to drive / escort the EV, plant C4, defuse C4, do whatever needs to be done. I often just play the objective and end up with a K/D of 5/30 or something stupid.

The biggest problem I have with any objective is C4 at the moment. A little anecdote to illustrate …

Last nigh on Waterloo on the attacking team we struggled to get past the wall. Getting there was difficult, but once we did getting the C4 to blow was almost impossible. We once got 3 players to the wall, got a plant down, killed a couple of Engies who came to defuse, but due to the long fuse and short spawn those same Engies came back for a 2nd attempt, and together with a couple of team-mates killed all of us and got the defuse.

It’s soul destroying to spend 5 minutes fighting your way to the plant area, eventually get the plant down, defend it heroically against a wave of defenders, and still come away empty handed because the game does everything in its power to help the defending team.[/QUOTE]

Sounds like an issue with the spawn waves tbh. The wave spawns and then by the time they get to the point the timer is about to tick again so they get a second chance if they die fast.

Spawns in objective/escort modes in a game like this can dictate too much. There is a good breadth of luck involved with spawn waves imo. They should find a way to standardize spawning that is fair and removes the luck factor.

(iwound) #73

Although this did happen in ET and QW it shouldnt continue to happen
and DB has a mechanic to fix this but isn’t used at the first stage. the dynamic spawn points moving closer to the objective.
in ET and QW spawn waves fixed this which created gaps in defence spawns and attack could consolidate a defence of the C4.
when spawn waves are properly implemented the whole play will change. we just need to wait for SD to fix this.

(Seanza) #74

I think this needs to happen sooner rather than later because it really could have a relatively big impact on map balance.

(Patriotqube) #75

Cant say what Rube0s ment, but I uses the dyno in W:ET to help me defend the objectives also, on Oasis for example im always having a dyno armed and ticking in the doorway to the objective, that way, theyll think twice before entering as they dont know when it will blow up, and it gives me a chance of respawn an get to objective before their dynos are exploded

Ontopic to the issue with empty servers. ive think i mentioned before that im a hardcore W:ET gamer has been since release, i was hoping DB would be as close as it could to that, and maybe it is, but its not close enough in my honest opinion, i just dont feel it, game is pretty and all that, but i never find myself thinking wow i miss it, like i do when ive been forced to not play WET for a while.

Its the movements and the weaponhandlings im annoyed with, if you can get them to be like WET, then i can live with all other stuff without problems, but the basic movements and weaponhandling… i feel like im walking in 2 feet mud when im playing the game, and i cant hit a barn not even if im standing inside it :frowning:

I know DB isnt WET and wasnt ment to be, and it dosent have to be, but ad the mechanics as they are in WET/QW and you can do w/e you want with the rest as the game is sure to be a success.

Right now if it dosent change, you will have thousands of ppl downloading the game, play it and loose interest very fast, there is a reason why people still play WET and QW even tho they are outdated and mostly unsupported, those ppl will imho not get that feeling for DB as it is now.

and the ppl playing COD or BF today im afraid is impossible to attract as they buy the game installs it and already are waiting for next release before the finished first map, well thats apparently their addiction.

Im hoping for a game i can play for years to come, and i wouldnt be afraid of paying for some stuff to it, if i can feel the game. which i cant atm - sorry

when thats said, i havent been able to play for 2 weeks or so because of work, so some of my concerns has maybe been fixed (crossing fingers here)

(iwound) #76

so will a lot of other things. we just need to be patient. there’s a long way to go yet. “small steps ellie”.

(Verticae) #77

[QUOTE=iwound;443759]area21 = 2
salvage = 2 plus the crawl space.
volcano = 2[/QUOTE]

Area 21: 2 entry points, optional side route, 3 area’s to enter objective.
Salvage: 7 different ways into base (8 including pronejump), 3 to forward spawn, 3 to objective (and 3 balconies to hold it from).
Volcano: 3 entrances behind the wall, 1 in front, multiple trickjumps/breaches.

(BomBaKlaK) #78

Totally agree with a lot of things I read over here.

Big issues for me :

  • TTK to fast (RoF ?)
  • lack of spawnwaves make the game clunky and chaotic
  • sides objs are missing or just useless (some of the protections make me smile)
  • Metagame is really poor (restrictions everywhere like in a console game aka “Push E” when you are in place really hate that ! tool select then use is much better)
  • Maps are really linear and claustrophobic and become boring really fast.
  • Runing Time to obj is to short due to the little maps, and with the lack of spawnwaves it turn to a giant meatgrindfest
  • Main Objectives are not really interesting due to the location, most part
  • Travel between objective is really really short ! you just finish one you can rush the second one directly, even if defense dont have respawn (lack of spawnwaves maybe I already talk about it)
  • Carrying objectives are just boring as hell … except maybe in camden but still here no big fun.
    There is no run ! there is no defense possible at all ! except maybe in london bridge. but spawn location, transmit point and picking obj are just broken !!

Defender spawn >>> near the transmit place or got a shorter way to intercept the carrier ! then maybe it’s gonna be playable.

I have a question to SD :
Is the same level design team who made the brink maps and the DB maps ?
There is still people in SD who were working on ETQW or even Wolf ET ? Or do you have the same team as brink ?
Cause maps feel like Brink to me, I mean little and claustrophobic
ETQW level design team did an awesome job ! So please think of this for your futur maps.

(Humate) #79

Liked:
*Generator plant objective
*Mining Laser
*Hack Objective
*DataBrain doc run

Disliked:
*MCP escort
*Flyer Drone Obj on Volcano

The differences in concept are small, but experientially those differences are massive, at least to me.

Also the other aspect that is missing is the feeling of momentum - locking down 1st, pushing forward to 2nd before 1st is complete.

The objective structure flows in ETQW (mcp maps excluded), allowing players to respond and play according to the bigger picture.

(Seanza) #80

Of course, but what if they spend all this time balancing the maps then when the spawns are fixed, they have to re-balance the maps again. No point in doing a job twice :wink: