It does technically as both sides have to endure the same crap but the game just isn’t suitable for what stopwatch should be about. This is due to the maps being heavily in favor of defense, in Stopwatch you need to be able to complete the map as quickly as possible so that when the team swap around the other team will have a harder time trying to beat the time your team set in the first round.
The map must be winnable by the Attacking team more easily than by the Defending team. Competition is played in Stopwatch mode, where NEITHER team scores ANY points if the defending team hold for the full duration of the map. Points are scored by whichever team completes the objective the fastest over 2 rounds. If neither team set a time, no-one scores any points, and the 2 rounds have been a waste of time playing.
Imagine playing 2 rounds on a single map for about 40 minutes for no one to win…
Last night I played sectower on defense for about 25 minutes, we lost the first two objectives in about 5 minutes only to hold them at the last stage for a staggering 20 minutes, despite them been the better team, just shows how defensively biased these maps can be.
I’ve not tried Stopwatch with the revised spawn times as no one plays stopwatch anymore on PC I think. However I think the revised times are only treating the symptoms rather than the problem at hand, map design, something that we tried discussing else where with disastrous results.
[QUOTE=ScumBag;375220]The game isn’t fun. It’s dumbed down, consolized, clunky and nobody cares about parkour. It’s a step back for SD from a complexity standpoint and bums me out to no end.[/QUOTE]Yes it is fun. Thanks for your contribution. But this thread is designed to suggest ways to improve the current set-up of Brink for players who currently enjoy it, and to ease the transition of newer players as well as help everyone stick around longer.
[QUOTE=ScumBag;375220]
If we keep watering this thing down to entice more players, pretty soon we’re going to have a Farmville clone.[/QUOTE]
Nobody’s buying the farmville analogy.
[QUOTE=.Chris.;375247]
Last night I played sectower on defense for about 25 minutes, we lost the first two objectives in about 5 minutes only to hold them at the last stage for a staggering 20 minutes, despite them been the better team, just shows how defensively biased these maps can be[/QUOTE]
I mentioned this in another thread as well, when I’m on defense, I have a look at that round timer and see we have about 15mins left and just sigh because I know it’s going to be 15 mins of sitting there doing the same old thing over and over with no one getting anywhere. It’s a chore, and a game shouldn’t be a chore, it should be fun… and double full holds are no fun.
[QUOTE=.Chris.;375247]It does technically as both sides have to endure the same crap but the game just isn’t suitable for what stopwatch should be about. This is due to the maps being heavily in favor of defense, in Stopwatch you need to be able to complete the map as quickly as possible so that when the team swap around the other team will have a harder time trying to beat the time your team set in the first round. [/QUOTE]Everytime I play Stopwatch with friends who’ve never played, we have to reiterate the rules. There-in lies some of the problem and the reason for this thread: its not obvious what the mode is and what makes it different from the standard mode.
[QUOTE=.Chris.;375247]I’ve not tried Stopwatch with the revised spawn times as no one plays stopwatch anymore on PC I think. However I think the revised times are only treating the symptoms rather than the problem at hand, map design, something that we tried discussing else where with disastrous results.[/QUOTE]It was still a discussion. Disagreeing with you is not a crime.
I still feel that the maps themselves are asymmetrical, regardless of what you make the Spawn Timers, the map design itself affects defensive bias. I had suggested an imposed handicap on Defense several times in the past with game mode suggestions like Deadpool; the defense/offense has a limited pool of lives to use in order to respawn. Then the match could have a defined end that has less to do with Time.
Defense has the advantage in the game. That’s a known aspect now; so what’s the point of looking back at how the maps were designed, rather than focusing on how to fix the game as it is? Let’s start looking forward with ideas rather than keep rehashing the same criticism. This is what I’ve been trying to tell you.
Stopwatch needs to be made sexier. Plain and simple. Its too dry as is. That’s why I suggested Team Clan War is stopwatch, rather than just calling the mode Stopwatch, which zero people seem to understand or play. (Console)
As far as improvements, the way around the map design is to revamp all the weapons, so that they are skill based.
At the moment, the “teamwork” side of the game, has no influence because its something everyone does on both teams in a game. It becomes a stalemate.
The weapons are so inaccurate and the streamlined way of buffing is so easy - that it hinders you from stopping the opposing team from being good team-mates. Thats what gunplay in objective gameplay is all about - stopping the opposition from doing all the class based stuff.
But SD didnt want a game, where the average joe couldnt buff someone because he couldnt kill 2 guys trying to stop him. They wanted every player to feel they made a contribution to the team…
Once that changes I’m sure setting times would be much more prevalent. And more players would be willing to stick around, knowing they aren’t in for a 40 minute game.
[QUOTE=Humate;375277]As far as improvements, the way around the map design is to revamp all the weapons, so that they are skill based.
At the moment, the “teamwork” side of the game, has no influence because its something everyone does on both teams in a game. It becomes a stalemate.
The weapons are so inaccurate and the streamlined way of buffing is so easy - that it hinders you from stopping the opposing team from being good team-mates. Thats what gunplay in objective gameplay is all about - stopping the opposition from doing all the class based stuff.
But SD didnt want a game, where the average joe couldnt buff someone because he couldnt kill 2 guys trying to stop him. They wanted every player to feel they made a contribution to the team…
Once that changes I’m sure setting times would be much more prevalent. And more players would be willing to stick around, knowing they aren’t in for a 40 minute game.[/QUOTE]I am not sure that changing the weapons alone will improve the mode, with DMG low in the game and no wipe-out multiple player weapons beyond grenade shooting which doesn’t really do that. It does and doesn’t. Remember, both sides get these improved weapons and the game itself is defensive bias. Not so sure that’s the ultimate solution. I am willing to be wrong.
I never said it was, no need to get pissy all time.
Limited lives just encourages camping.
There’s not much you can do without altering the map layouts, adjusting spawn times can improve the situation but doesn’t solve the core problems. Changing weapon behavior may help in conjunction with revised spawn times even further, people dieing quicker will mean if an attack can get the up on a defensive line up and take them out rather quickly it would give them plenty time to attempt the objective before the defense respawns and are on their arses again but good luck doing that with current map layouts. Seems 80% of map cover seems to be on the defense side, they have way too many areas to hide behind and buff up. They also seem to have the high ground on just about every map.
[QUOTE=Humate;375277]As far as improvements, the way around the map design is to revamp all the weapons, so that they are skill based.
At the moment, the “teamwork” side of the game, has no influence because its something everyone does on both teams in a game. It becomes a stalemate.
The weapons are so inaccurate and the streamlined way of buffing is so easy - that it hinders you from stopping the opposing team from being good team-mates. Thats what gunplay in objective gameplay is all about - stopping the opposition from doing all the class based stuff.
But SD didnt want a game, where the average joe couldnt buff someone because he couldnt kill 2 guys trying to stop him. They wanted every player to feel they made a contribution to the team…
Once that changes I’m sure setting times would be much more prevalent. And more players would be willing to stick around, knowing they aren’t in for a 40 minute game.[/QUOTE]
Yeah could help but the darn map layouts favor the defense in so many ways that even a lesser skilled defense can still win against a better skilled attack.
There is no ultimate solution, not in this game, we can only hope they make the next game better.
Shame we never got that SDK, game could have been some what more playable by now.
As said by DA, this game feels like a chore at times.
Weapon improvements in terms of accuracy/rate of fire… higher damage only comes into play if you can aim at someones head (damage multiplyer) .
And yes both teams will have access to these improved weapons, but due to the fact they now require skill, the differential b/w you and the enemy comes into play here. Average joe wont be able to spawn camp you on CCity, because you will out aim him and his team-mates trying to buff him.
This allows you to also offer your resources(buffs) to your team, now that you can bully the enemy.
Think of it like a domino effect - you stop the enemy from using their resources, which allows you to use yours, giving your team greater power.
[QUOTE=Humate;375283]Weapon improvements in terms of accuracy/rate of fire… higher damage only comes into play if you can aim at someones head (damage multiplyer) .
And yes both teams will have access to these improved weapons, but due to the fact they now require skill, the differential b/w you and the enemy comes into play here. Average joe wont be able to spawn camp you on CCity, because you will out aim him and his team-mates trying to buff him.
This allows you to also offer your resources(buffs) to your team, now that you can bully the enemy.
Think of it like a domino effect - you stop the enemy from using their resources, which allows you to use yours, giving your team greater power.[/QUOTE]I understand the domino effect, but the defense is able to recover faster than the offense and is always up a man. I am sure you know what I mean. More skillful weapons just means a higher probability of the defense driving the offense back to their spawn even FASTER than currently in my opinion! On most maps. And then locking them down in their spawn indefinitely. +5 odds/advantage to defense. If this were D&D. Lol.
You have to impose a real handicap on the defense because it can negate skill by trumping with superior numbers, efficiency, and defensive reacting rather than having to be offensive at all.
There needs to be spawn changes, there needs to be map layout changes, there needs to be weapon tweaks… there needs to be too much. Without all that’s mentioned, there’s no way to save it. The biggest issue is map layout, and that will never be fixed. You can try rejigging the lesser things (and yes, the spread needs to be adjusted towards personal skill and aim regardless of the map problems… that’s a given and only an idiot would argue against that), but when the biggest problem is the part that can’t be changed… then that means there will always be a problem. Sure other tweaks may alleviate the pain somewhat, but those pains will never truly be gone.
[QUOTE=.Chris.;375282]
There is no ultimate solution, not in this game, we can only hope they make the next game better.
Shame we never got that SDK, game could have been some what more playable by now.
As said by DA, this game feels like a chore at times.[/QUOTE]
Only true way (IMO) is to impose a REAL handicap on the defense. And would be more fun, imo.
Here is an example of real handicaps that would negate the defensive-strength core:
[ul]
[li]An environmental weapon that can be triggered that is closer to the Offensive Spawn and can be a focused strategy killing 3-4 enemy all at once. [/li][/ul]
[ul]
[li]Defense gets eliminated when they die. And offense doesn’t.[/li][/ul]
[ul]
[li]Defense is a man short compared to offense.[/li][/ul]
[ul]
[li]Offense can be down but not out. They can always be revived. They’re never sent back to spawn at all. Or they can revive themselves by tapping a button regardless of what class they’re. (a la Gears of War 3) [/li][/ul]
You realize the one position they can’t seem to fill for even a crosshair adjustment is a UI coder… and yet the bulk of your OP suggestions require UI work…
While your ideas may be interesting (I personally think they’re absolutely terrible, but that’s just my opinion), more importantly, they don’t address the core issue of player retention/player win-back that Brink needs to stay viable.
Having to go to these extremes:
An environmental weapon that can be triggered that is closer to the Offensive Spawn and can be a focused strategy killing 3-4 enemy all at once.
Defense gets eliminated when they die. And offense doesn’t.
Defense is a man short compared to offense.
Offense can be down but not out. They can always be revived. They’re never sent back to spawn at all. Or they can revive themselves by tapping a button regardless of what class they’re. (a la Gears of War 3)
… this simply means the core Brink gameplay mechanics as they currently exist are completely broken. You have now just literally hit the nail on the head and validated the many “Brink haters’” complaints that you have ridiculed and trolled so much across these forums.
The 40 minute double full hold is annoying and not that fun. completely agreed. We’ve started experimenting with some various strategies to help…
–if we have an odd number of players, rather than have someone spectate, the attacking side always gets the extra person, and someone will switch on the 2nd half (if need be) to make sure the attacking team has the +1 both times
–honor rule: no dehacking, no defusing (or a single defuse of a given HE plant). (harder to implement in bigger teams matches, but this definitely helps.
the 2nd one really shifts emphasis to the progression between checkpoints, rather than “do you still have a single engi standing after a chokepoint battle” if yes = de-hack/fuse, which = rinse and repeat.
it’s hard to organize honor rules, and we dont do any of the other limits you see in comp rules, but we’ve had a bit of fun playing around with this…unfortunately, since everything is p2p instead of dedi-server organized, it’s hard to keep the rules in place across multiple matches.
[QUOTE=.Chris.;375282]
There’s not much you can do without altering the map layouts, adjusting spawn times can improve the situation but doesn’t solve the core problems. Changing weapon behavior may help in conjunction with revised spawn times even further, people dieing quicker will mean if an attack can get the up on a defensive line up and take them out rather quickly it would give them plenty time to attempt the objective before the defense respawns and are on their arses again but good luck doing that with current map layouts. Seems 80% of map cover seems to be on the defense side, they have way too many areas to hide behind and buff up. They also seem to have the high ground on just about every map.
Yeah could help but the darn map layouts favor the defense in so many ways that even a lesser skilled defense can still win against a better skilled attack.
There is no ultimate solution, not in this game, we can only hope they make the next game better.
Shame we never got that SDK, game could have been some what more playable by now.
As said by DA, this game feels like a chore at times.[/QUOTE]
QFT arg the dreaded 10chars
[QUOTE=wolfnemesis75;375289]Only true way (IMO) is to impose a REAL handicap on the defense. And would be more fun, imo.
Here is an example of real handicaps that would negate the defensive-strength core:
[ul]
[li]An environmental weapon that can be triggered that is closer to the Offensive Spawn and can be a focused strategy killing 3-4 enemy all at once. [/li][/ul]
[ul]
[li]Defense gets eliminated when they die. And offense doesn’t.[/li][/ul]
[ul]
[li]Defense is a man short compared to offense.[/li][/ul]
[ul]
[li]Offense can be down but not out. They can always be revived. They’re never sent back to spawn at all. Or they can revive themselves by tapping a button regardless of what class they’re. (a la Gears of War 3) [/li][/ul][/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=wolfnemesis75;375289][ul]
[li]An environmental weapon that can be triggered that is closer to the Offensive Spawn and can be a focused strategy killing 3-4 enemy all at once. [/li][/ul]
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=GreasedScotsman;375290]You realize the one position they can’t seem to fill for even a crosshair adjustment is a UI coder… and yet the bulk of your OP suggestions require UI work…
While your ideas may be interesting (I personally think they’re absolutely terrible, but that’s just my opinion), more importantly, they don’t address the core issue of player retention/player win-back that Brink needs to stay viable.][/QUOTE] Brink is viable. You are being extreme. There are plenty of people playing. Are you really a Mod. Because at times you don’t come across as objective?
[QUOTE=GreasedScotsman;375290]Having to go to these extremes:
… this simply means the core Brink gameplay mechanics as they currently exist are completely broken.[/QUOTE] These are just suggestions. A good attacking team can still win, but the defense has the advantage especially in stopwatch. I never ever said that this wasn’t the case. Thanks for the endorsement, buddy.
[QUOTE=GreasedScotsman;375290]You have now just literally hit the nail on the head and validated the many “Brink haters’” complaints that you have ridiculed and trolled so much across these forums.[/QUOTE]I didn’t put a nail in the coffin of anything. Get over yourself. This thread is for newer gamers not to beat the dead horse of the ESL hurts and frustrations. This thread is directed at improving play for players newer to this type of game. The game is not broken if everything is designed to give the defense an advantage, if that’s the way the game was designed to be. Although I understand your frustration (and why you jumped into this thread when you did) I am not trying to fix the game for you and all the rest who left the game entirely for reasons beyond my control.
Nice work. Thanks for trolling back. Once again the pot calling the kettle black. These are suggestions. Not the law.
Anyone else confused by him? The game isn’t broken, but he’s suggesting ways to fix it. What? Ok sure it’s not broken if it’s designed to be defensively biased… we’ll call it poorly designed then, does re-classifying the issue fix anything? No, it just means you can post more pedantic **** and avoid the issue at hand.
[QUOTE=GreasedScotsman;375290]You realize the one position they can’t seem to fill for even a crosshair adjustment is a UI coder… and yet the bulk of your OP suggestions require UI work…While your ideas may be interesting (I personally think they’re absolutely terrible, but that’s just my opinion), more importantly, they don’t address the core issue of player retention/player win-back that Brink needs to stay viable.
Having to go to these extremes:[/b]
Nice work.[/QUOTE]And your ideas are so fantastic. This must be why you design games for a living? Wait, you don’t? If you do, why not join SD staff? Because having honor rules of not leaving a hack location, can’t remove a hack box, tweaking spawn timers, disallowing operative abilities, can’t drop more than one turret, etc. Those are great ideas too? Right. Absolutely not horrible? Give me a break dude.
You jumped all over this thread and proved me just as right. What’s your goal? What are you trying to accomplish? Is it something positive? I just don’t see how. Not sure where my thread is negative at all. Sorry.
