All classes can do all objectives. Yay or nay?

(Ashog) #101

I am afraid that SD won’t probably do that no matter what because of the resourses having been spent on that. That would be a huge setback for them. So now SD has to probably make the biggest and most critical decision throughout the whole game development. I don’t wanna be in their chair right now.

(Bangtastic) #102

Only c4 plant and defuse was given to everyone as well as repair ev (which is quite fair because every char can deal dmg to EV). Milk jug was already global! Using PDA to hack was already global! Escort EV was also global!

@FunkyFunk #102 well I guess I was too late for that, wasnt easy to find out about DB^^

(MrFunkyFunk) #103

iirc the consoles obj (now “hack”) used to be an engineer (at least on WC, wasn’t it cvops on Waterloo?) restricted obj earlier this year.

(Volcano) #104

i think it was funky but sniper is useless at close range which is why it was changed (i think)

(stealth6) #105

[QUOTE=Tast1c;462781]Only c4 plant and defuse was given to everyone as well as repair ev (which is quite fair because every char can deal dmg to EV).

Milk jug was already global!

Using PDA to hack was already global!

Escort EV was also global!

I can understand your frustration but…

beaker-dont-give-a-fuck.jpg1680×1050 91.2 KB

@FunkyFunk #102 ah ok well I guess I was too late for that^^[/QUOTE]

This post annoys me way more than it should. When they introduced the PDA hack I’m pretty sure that even then people said, it would probably be better if it was a cvops hack objective. Although at the same time I think people were annoyed that the hack objective was added to Waterloo in the first place so they were glad when they could just rush it with more people. (Initially Waterloo was just a blow the doors - blow the trains)

I love the strategy in only killing the objective player on the enemy team and can’t believe you can dismiss it so easily. <insert boiling frog story>
It’s like they’re slowly brainwashing you. Eventually you just give in and accept it even though you might not like it.

But I shouldn’t be surprised this happens all the time, gamers get f’d over and then a few months later they’ll cave and buy the game / console anyway.

(Ashog) #106

[QUOTE=stealth6;462797]This post annoys me way more than it should. When they introduced the PDA hack I’m pretty sure that even then people said, it would probably be better if it was a cvops hack objective. Although at the same time I think people were annoyed that the hack objective was added to Waterloo in the first place so they were glad when they could just rush it with more people. (Initially Waterloo was just a blow the doors - blow the trains)

I love the strategy in only killing the objective player on the enemy team and can’t believe you can dismiss it so easily. <insert boiling frog story>
It’s like they’re slowly brainwashing you. Eventually you just give in and accept it even though you might not like it.

But I shouldn’t be surprised this happens all the time, gamers get f’d over and then a few months later they’ll cave and buy the game / console anyway.[/QUOTE]

This

chars

(MrFunkyFunk) #107

Another way to have looked at it, instead of making it global, might have been making the sniper less fragile & more useful for his team (more than just passive & ability spotting) at close combat. Stuff that was discussed months ago again & again.
Reduce the scope zoom level or offer 2 presets, make the noscope shots more predictable (cone patern), give him a decent secondary (reducing rof/spread), … and balance it by reducing the bodyshots damages.

But there’s no point talking of what could have been.

(Volcano) #108

[QUOTE=MrFunkyFunk;462809]Another way to have looked at it
[/QUOTE]

they can make a close range loadout for the covie, much like there was in et with the sten and to some extent the fg42

(Ecano) #109

Coming back of three vacation weeks and just realized there are no nades and classes are changed, game looks more polish but sorry I strongly dislike all classes repairing.

(Erkin31) #110

Using PDA to hack was already global!

I was waiting they add class-restrictions for this objective.
I was thinking that these objectives was not fully implemented because they waited to add SMG and disguise to coverOps.
For me, it was a big problem, but temporary.

(Ashog) #111

same here…

(Mustang) #112

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Erkin31 again.

(Raviolay) #113

[QUOTE=INF3RN0;462730]First off DB was barely a single obj class based game right from the start with all the globals, so you should have been fuming with rage from the get go. Well the only class that is a lost cause is the engineer. Why? Because he’s a completely defensively biased class and was only really there for objs and questionably for defense (though there were always better choices imo). Soldier being the only one with a grenade now and still having combat superiority is still a solid class (body shot damage makes it too easy to play though). Recon has been and still is a niche class so can’t comment on that. Now that engineer doesn’t do objs it’s obvious that it needs to be more appealing outside of its obj role.

I still think the old system of a single obj class was better for strategical play conceptually, but agnostic objs like Doc runs are really great so I am unsure it is required in all cases. The only reason why single obj classes were good was because all the objs were crap. I’d like to trash all the main obj “f button” types (plant, repair) if I had my way, and replace them with more fast paced and dynamic agnostic objs. Almost all of the main objectives are just plain boring to me. I’ve said it many times that I want class specific map flow side objs (hack doors, repair bridges, etc) to give them more unique worth outside of combat, but if someone can come up with agnostic main objs that are as good as doc runs for example I’d gladly abandon the old single class obj system.

So again I never said I liked this system as it is currently, but I am willing to see what they have planned for the next update with it. Otherwise what I want specifically is something completely different, and imo better than both- but who is to say.[/QUOTE]

TLDR breakdown…

So in a nut shell in order to

“balance the characters in a way that you would consider each to have pros and cons to make your composition something to really strategize about while retaining a-objs”

Is to change the objectives on maps that are already near beta stage…:rolleyes:

He has been saying that for month’s, I can remember most of my back back forth with him in was centered on class balance with one objective class. With divergent gameplay to encourage playing the none objective classes. Like giving them ability’s that are not just equipment based RE combat slide for a certain classes.

(Ashog) #114

I was just thinking…

What does Splash Damage name stand for? To me it means weapons with explosive power capable of causing catastrophic damage in a certain area.

Now think about how many characters that have such weapons are present in DB? Only 5 out of 15! Nader (only now became available), Fragger (the only one having nades), Arty and Skyhammer (poorly executed artilleries which kill noone and can’t damage EV) and BBQ with his molotovs.

I am not even mentioning The Eye because her 3rd eye cam is an abomination.

Sounds funneh, doesn’t it? No reel splash damage from Splash Damage indeed.

(stealth6) #115

Ye and with Fireteam being the other half of warchest where are our fireteam overlays already? :tongue: :smiley:

(rapid_shot) #117

I’ve gotten a better look at the class agnostic objectives and I have praise as well as a huge concern.

Upon further review, its not as bad as I thought (but still not even close to preferred). It’s nice in the sense that I can be any class I want and still contribute to the benefit of the team.So from a selfish point of view, its kinda fun. At the very least, I can now understand wanting to at least explore this idea.

My huge concern is how much change is going to have to happen to balance it out for offense and defense. This has clearly padded the offensive side and I’m worried that in order to balance this, you will now have to elongate the time it takes to complete objectives. Objectives that take too long take away from the fun and appeal of completing them since you are fairly certain you are going to die 10+ times in the process.

I’ve brainstormed ideas on how to pad defense to balance this out and all the ideas I come up with are spawn location moves or shorter spawn times (which doesn’t sound appealing). But it really seems that the only way to balance this out is to give primary objectives back to the class named after an occupation whose job description is to come up with solutions to technical problems. Giving it to just one primary class brings the game back to requiring teamwork to complete objectives as opposed to…


I paid to give my 2 cents and darn-it if I’m not going to give it! :smiley: