Assault/Soldier

(DarkangelUK) #21

I don’t think they need any nonsense like that, all they need is the weaponry to match their namesake. They should have the big guns, the MG42, the panzer, the flamethrower. Soldiers have been fine in RtCW, W:ET and ETQW without dicking about with their health.

(tokamak) #22

Feels uncomfortable to let them have big guns in London. You want kick ass SWAT guys breaching and pouring into buildings in slow motion.

(DarkangelUK) #23

We want a useful class, not a boring generic soldier with a name that no one wants to play. Buffed health and a shield still makes him boring. Bring back what made the class fun.

(Violator) #24

I’ve been playing soldier mainly and have been trying to play the ‘gung ho’ defence breaker but its not been very effective. I may clear out 1 or rarely 2 players but due to the fact that the game currently doesn’t reward breaking cover at any time I will invariably be taken to 1/2 health or less after the initial attack, and invariably be taken out by a full-health player or a turret, with little or no chance to run for cover / fall back. I do like the shield idea - the trade would be reduced mobility (like carrying an undeployed turret does currently) and perhaps a weak-ish pistol in the off-hand.

The other issue is meds, I think mainly due to the lack of info for them re downed players but I usually get only 1 or 2 revives in an entire match, with the exception of holding chokepoints such as the Whitechapel ammo obj room.

On the weapons front, I felt that the recent patch has nerfed the soldier1 MG a lot (the AR still seems pretty good), but soldier 2 is way better - the MP still doesn’t do much damage though it has a crazy high ROF, but the primary weapon feels really good now. It has a slower ROF than most of the other weapons but it is very satisfying to use.

I also agree that having the soldier do the C4 objectives (like QW) would be a good move and would give the poor sod something to do other than get shot by Rex’s fing turrets ;).

(tokamak) #25

I understand the allergic reaction to regeneration. But I do think that things change when only one class gets to do it. It means that you’re the only one who doesn’t have to be conservative with his health. You can bust in do damage, bail out, regen and bust in again and if the team doesn’t have a medic then they will be very low on health and thus screwed.

Getting more freedom and less punished for taking risks make the Assault a very unique class this way.

(DarkangelUK) #26

I think you’ve missed the other discussions in general that dying is too quick across the board. Health regen or not, it’s still a boring class to play and would only fit in with a TDM situation if that. The soldier has guns and shoots, that’s it, the health regen just means he’ll be a hit and run class which isn’t a power house at all, he’s an escape artist that needs to regen. The soldiers in the other games were a fun class to play that could shift the tide of a match using his unique weapons… this just sounds boring. I think you’ve completely missed what made the soldier fun to play.

(Breo) #27

Well I see less covert ops ingame then soldiers… actually I play the most fieldops and soldier.
A riot shield (to protect the object class) would be cool :slight_smile:

(INF3RN0) #28

I would like to be able to play soldier as the aggressive defense breaker and frag fest executioner, but the whole design of the class just doesn’t promote any of that. I’ve found that soldier only really shines in TDM where you encounter more 1v1s and win due to your tank features. Even then it’s not very consistent. I think the current design is headed in the wrong direction, or at least needs a completely opposite loadout. Then again the meta game, as its been said multiple times already, is where the real problem lies. Class weaponry completely loses its value with the high rate of fire and short fire fights. Next patch let us see if our demand for it is truly the solution to the problem :wink:.

(Anti) #29

I doubt you’ll see anything related to your ‘list of demands’ (:wink:) in terms of weapons next patch, simply because we’d like to get movement and responsiveness a bit better first. If we continue to adjust that at the same time as we adjust weapons we’re likely to bounce between too lethal and the horrid ‘cant kill, too many reloads’ state.

Once responsiveness starts to feel right, even if people still die too quick, then would be a good point to start trying out a wider range of solutions to the lethality feedback.

EDIT: I’d agree with a lot of the feedback here as well, right now lethality does probably prevent Assault guys being suited to their role in the way they should be.

(Humate) #30

The thing that prompts me to overlook the heavy is the footspeed.
Kind of miss the mechanic that increases the player speed with a lighter weapon.

(stealth6) #31

But why even have a seperate class just for a handful of weapons? What’s the difference between swapping main gun to panzer on an engineer compared to selecting the soldier class?

Depends on the implementation of the weapons: Cooldown, ROF, damage, splashdamage,…

(DarkangelUK) #32

I don’t understand what you’re getting at here, the soldier class has always been the heavy weapons guy. With that thinking, why even have classes at all? Just have a single character that has all the tools required in that case. My view is that a class should be able to do something that none of the other classes can, with the soldier in DB we don’t really have that. Having heavy weapons in the other games made him stand out and was good at dispersing groups of enemies in a single blow and made them more cautious about grouping together. In DB grouping together is an advantage with no real downside apart from not paying attention to grenades or air strike markers. Just watch a few RtCW panzer kill movies and see.

(stealth6) #33

The thought did cross my mind why have classes at all? But each class comes with limitations and certain advantages (speed/health). Another reason for multiple classes is that it simplifies the loadout screen. If it was all 1 character it would be a bit more confusing that when you select a medkit only smgs would be availible etc.
This obviously contradicts what I said earlier, but limiting 1 class for taking a heavy weapon is slightly less confusing then all classes mashed into one. Plus maybe the heavy weapons could be used as gadgets instead of the turret for example.

Soldier has never really stood out as a useful class imo. (well I didn’t play QW much so can’t comment on that) Most of the time you’d go panzer for 1 spawn, rush to the enemies spawn / chokepoint, fire off a panzer then selfkill and grab a different class. So then why was it even necessary to create a whole class for those 30 seconds of play time?
Another example was MG42 in the bank on goldrush, but even that was a risky tactic since you’re a sitting duck once they know you’re in there and if they just pre-nade you’re screwed anyway.
Never even saw a point to using the flamethrower.

(DarkangelUK) #34

That’s because you never played RtCW :smiley:

(Anti) #35

In ETQW Soldier was a big deal for indoor sections, having a Hyperblaster or Obliterator to try and clear several guys at once was very useful. We will get to that point with the DB’s Assault class in the end as well.

(.Chris.) #36

I was playing with soldier2 last night as a result of reading this thread, it’s not half bad but you have to play quite cautiously, once you get in a good position you can mow down the enemy with ease, the big gun it uses as Violator said feels very satisfying to use. I’m not sure but it did appear to have really high headshot damaged though the players I killed with headshot may have been half health or so and tbh, at medium to long range it’s luck if you get a headshot. Give the solider C4 maybe an option yeah, I liked that in ET:QW.

(stealth6) #37

I think the fact that you didn’t try it out until you read this thread says more than anything. I’m not saying it’s a weak class, I am saying it’s not a very interesting class objective wise.

(Mustang) #38

In my mind right now soldiers should be winning 2vs1 encounters ~65% of the time.

(warbie) #39

I must admit to having trouble justifying the soldier. We used them for the panzer and occasionally sniper in RTCW/ET, but I never found it that interesting a class to play. Given the choice i’d probably drop the class, along with the covert, and give the lieutenant the option to have a tertiary weapon - sniper or panzer. Maybe give airstrikes to the engies as they’d be losing turrets and mines!

Less is more.

(tokamak) #40

I agree that we need to consider this class in a broader context than just 1v1 encounters. It’s not just about killing players but also about surviving the combat (which may or may not end in actual kills on either side) and being able to go right back in again

The Assault class needs to be disruptive, distracting and be a resilient front behind which the other classes can work better. It’s not about getting one (or two) kills off and then being hurt so bad that the next guy will come and finish you. If you can instead incapacitate opponents and drive them back a block so that the rest can do their thing then that’s preferable.

In this regard I think things like flamethrowers, rocket launchers and higher health, although being obvious, are very uninspired solutions. And I frigging love being a level 4 WET soldier. The movement speed+flamethrower is incredibly fun but it’s simply too wacky for this game.

For an offensive assault, the automatic shotgun would be perfect, dish out a lot of hurt indiscriminately at close range, kills or no kills and then pull back to catch health/ammo and move back in again. That’s why I think a class unique regenerative system would work so great in conjunction and differentiate the specific role of this class much better.

Why I’m banking on disruption and indiscriminate violence violence more than accurate lethality is because I think this is the role of the covert ops, and currently the covert ops is doing a pretty poor role at that. If you you can push the assault further into being just an all-round bad-ass then you can also afford to make the covert ops a premeditated yet fragile assassin.

Or for inspiration:

A relentless brawler. I still think that regeneration is tantamount for this. You can even diversify the ways the assault classes can regenerate. The limited shield regeneration, the full (but slow) health regeneration and a merit-based max hp increase per kill.

Just anything to keep the assault class on going without merely giving him the advantage on the first encounter, which is the only thing that increased hp actually does.

It may be balanced and even powerful but what you describe isn’t quite the kind of role you want the assault class to be.