Change supply meter so that getting killed isn't an advantage

(H0RSE) #41

[QUOTE=shirosae;376918]This is the mistake you’re making: You’re trying to convince them that dying can be tactically useful; and therefore dying in a game can be a valid choice. You’re right about this. The problem is that they don’t care. They don’t assign value to things by how tactical/well functioning they are. They assign value in games based on what ideas they like in concept, and want games to fit this internal hierarchy even when it doesn’t apply*.

Their problem isn’t that dying in games isn’t tactical. Their problem is that it is. Because they desperately need ‘my death’ = ‘always bad’, for some reason they’ll never explain to you. It’s the same thing you tend to see with TK-Revives, trickjumping etc. People see a concept they don’t like, and immediately demand that it must not be useful. Just put it down to more Justice-Leaguery and move on.[/QUOTE]

You are straying off course, and it just makes you look silly. You are clouding up what tactics choosing to die can and should grant a player. Using that Starcraft vid as an example, no one is arguing that sacrificing oneself to create a distraction or to allow your team to advance should be frowned upon - “tactics” in that sense is fine. What we are saying (or at least me) is that if a player uses up all his supply bar pips, choosing to sacrifice himself shouldn’t be a “quick fix” to get it automatically refilled. I mean, that is the title of the thread - "Change supply meter so that getting killed isn’t an advantage."

If anyone is guilty of “Justice-Leaguery” it’s all you guys who are gung-ho on trying to prove all the advantages and tactics that /kill and sacrificing oneself granted in past games.

(wolfnemesis75) #42

Dying/Respawning shouldn’t be rewarded at all. Being able to get pips back by purposely dying is lame.

(MoonOnAStick) #43

Since dying involves the loss of two health pips and 25% of gun power, I’d say players are already penalised quite heavily for deaths in Brink.

Standing around at the spawn, waiting for supply meters to regenerate, so that your team can set off suitably buffed sounds pretty tedious.

(H0RSE) #44

Are you talking about health and damage buffs? If so, they need to be administered by teammates (or themselves) meaning players can an entire match without every having that them. No one starts with them

Standing around at the spawn, waiting for supply meters to regenerate, so that your team can set off suitably buffed sounds pretty tedious.

The moral of the story is “smart pip management.” Know when, where and who to use pips on, rather than buff everything and everyone until your pips run out, then kill yourself to reset your supplies, rinse and repeat.

(tokamak) #45

[QUOTE=Humate;376856]warning contains explicit language

Like I said - this works in team based fps as well[/QUOTE]

Yeah I know the retard magnet its amazing, I love to do it with terran buildings as well.

However, the act of sacrificing yourself is different from dying to get a replenish, in one case you give up something and hope it pays dividend, in the other you give up nothing in order to get to a better position. Thundermuffin and you keep conveniently interchanging these two.

(MoonOnAStick) #46

[QUOTE=H0RSE;376942]Are you talking about health and damage buffs? If so, they need to be administered by teammates (or themselves) meaning players can an entire match without every having that them. No one starts with them.[/QUOTE]What I was trying to imply was that these two buffs in particular confer a large advantage on the player and most teams seek to give them to all members. Indeed, given the slightly erratic spread, I see them as something of a requirement. Apologies if that didn’t come across.

(tokamak) #47

They don’t replenish automatically once give though. It’s an advantage but only an advantage if sustained by team-mates which decreases the value in staying alive.

(gooey79) #48

I’d call spending buffs on your team then re-spawning to another full set of pips as ‘smart pip management’.

(L00fah) #49

[QUOTE=MoonOnAStick;376941]Since dying involves the loss of two health pips and 25% of gun power, I’d say players are already penalised quite heavily for deaths in Brink.

Standing around at the spawn, waiting for supply meters to regenerate, so that your team can set off suitably buffed sounds pretty tedious.[/QUOTE]
^This^
You sacrifice all the buffs you’ve received from your team mates and it’s typically in your best interest to stay alive so you don’t waste more pips (as a group) just getting YOUR buffs back. That one pip used to buff your health might be the pip needed to revive a vital team member before your objective gets camped. = /

I don’t know any good players who sacrifice themselves just to get pips back.

(Baumbo) #50

Command posts being able to give back supply is dumb, because you can use one every time you respawn. It would be the same thing as if you died and had your supply restored. If you removed the command post in the spawn, you would have to make a spawn screen for loadouts, which is what the command post was created to avoid. If you have only the in field command posts restore supply, then that makes spawn camping more viable. The team controlling the field would have a huge advantage over the displaced team. Essentially, whoever wins the first battle and sets up shop wins the objective or the game.

Having you not regain supply on respawn is dumb, because then the momentum of the game would be broken. Having the team in the field weaker than the team attacking into them is balanced, because the attacking team does not get to choose the terrain of the engagement. They HAVE to attack into whatever the defending team has planned. If there was no supply restoration on respawn, the team which had just respawned would be at both a terrain, and supply disadvantage. The team who had respawned would have wasted their supply, any revive syringes thrown out would have been a waste, all buffs were removed on death, turrets destroyed, and mines removed. On top of that, the respawned team would have to buff everyone, and then attack again. They would have no supply and be at a significant disadvantage. Again, whoever controlled the field and won the first engagement would win.

I can only see one upside. When a guy is being revived and you shoot him, that would be worth more. Which I love doing.

(Thundermuffin) #51

[QUOTE=tokamak;376944]Yeah I know the retard magnet its amazing, I love to do it with terran buildings as well.

However, the act of sacrificing yourself is different from dying to get a replenish, in one case you give up something and hope it pays dividend, in the other you give up nothing in order to get to a better position. Thundermuffin and you keep conveniently interchanging these two.[/QUOTE]

You aren’t in a completely better position, though; do you have more supply points? Yes, you do, but you are now away from the objective, have no buffs (remember, they are essential in this game unless you’re playing people way below your skill level), and the enemy now knows you are a player down and can capitalize on that. That’s not what I would call being in a better position, unless you are really sure your team can hold a 5v6 push, and in this game that isn’t certain like in other games.

If Brink’s maps were halfway decent and the guns shot straight, one would see that /killing out could easily be a mistake that a lot of teams would capitalize on easily, even if you think it is fullproof. One team could have someone /kill, and then the other team could just completely wipe them out now that they’re in a disadvantage. You won’t see this in Brink, however, as it’s too random for that. :confused:

(L00fah) #52

Honestly, the same could be said for people who suicide, especially if they’re on Security.
The team is down one man (and a buffer is one of the worst people to lose), they’re away from the objective and they only have a singular advantage of buffing… Which doesn’t make THAT big a difference in the game (seriously… Play a game without buffs one day).
It’s still very similar, but more tedious.

(Humate) #53

However, the act of sacrificing yourself is different from dying to get a replenish, in one case you give up something and hope it pays dividend, in the other you give up nothing in order to get to a better position.

The cost is only obvious in 6v6 stopwatch, which effects the team more than the player.
You concede the area youre standing on, and you accept the number disadvantage for your team, in exchange for a restock. Ive seen games lost on poorly timed respawns… ive seen games won with it also, which ive already posted on earlier in the thread. :slight_smile:

Their problem isn’t that dying in games isn’t tactical. Their problem is that it is.

Yes. The examples were given more to demonstrate that its only a problem in their mind.
The reality is not every kill is advantageous. Not every death is disadvantageous. Even if SD went and changed the supply pips to regen, that would still be the case.

(L00fah) #54

The ultimate penalty for dying is teabagging.
Teabagging = game balancing.

(Commander_Keen) #55

Hey L00fah did you mean tea bagging or sand bagging. I’m trying to keep up with the current terms that people use but last I understood tea bagging was a taunt you do after killing some one by repeatedly pressing the crouch button over their corpse simulating the dangling of ones “tea bag” of mountain oysters into their open mouth. Sand bagging as in card games is the art of making your team seem to have a disadvantage or holding back where you could have won a hand to game the “low Bauer” or for some other gain, or to actually be a jerk and hurt your own team.

(L00fah) #56

This one, old man. :wink:

(tokamak) #57

Still a better position nonetheless or you wouldn’t do it. That’s why the cost of dying ought to be higher.
I think you’re starting to lose track of the discussion. My position is that a game should aspire to have a player invest so much into his life that the thought of suiciding to make use of the next respawn just should never creep up in his mind. Yet your argument is that respawning in the game as it currently is is not a bad thing. It’s completely beside the point.

(Verticae) #58

Making choices that affect teamplay have no place in Brink! Booo to teamplay!

(tokamak) #59

Great position of my argument there. Let’s continue the discussion on how I think the internet really holds gaming back and how shooters are best played on a DDR dance-pad.

(zenstar) #60

You obviously haven’t thought things through properly…
TWO DDR dance pads… one for aiming and one for movement.
Sheesh tok. Really!