before making suggestions i would like to remind that everyone in server is free to choose his class.
so, overpowered classes would become the choice of everyone. therefore ruinning the game.
PS: hope next community question will be “new game or new maps for etqw ?”
[QUOTE=edxot;408241]before making suggestions i would like to remind that everyone in server is free to choose his class.
so, overpowered classes would become the choice of everyone. therefore ruinning the game.
PS: hope next community question will be “new game or new maps for etqw ?”[/QUOTE]
That’s why I often decide to switch to medic from what I want to play as. When I say “what I want to play” it means - from the class that appears to me much more at the moment… yet it has not enough combat-power to stand against RamboMedic. There was an argument, that it’s free choice so classes don’t have to be balanced, well - that kills what it sits on…
About “Fixed” from BioSnark: I totally disagree, and you can read why in the same post you quoted part of, in the argumentation part of it. To cut long story short: There is no way to keep thing balanced, I assume having more or having less turrets per team means something in terms of balance, when we firstly got it then we add a commander capable of setting a - example - turret, IF you won’t take the decision away from someone else, assuming commander have wider array of possible actions. That is the argument.
Have a good day!
There was an argument, that it’s free choice so classes don’t have to be balanced, well - that kills what it sits on…
The comment was that players dont have a leg to stand on complaining about rambo medics on their own team, when they are doing most of the work to help the team win.
Balance is another issue altogether. If the medic was nerfed all one would need to do is prioritise the medic on every engagement, and every push would be held pretty easily. The medic needs to be able to hold its own in combat, or the whole thing collapses.
It should go further than that. A player should be able to give up his combat vitality in favour of higher support potential if that’s what he prefers. Vice versa as well, a player should be able to give up some of his medic role to become a more dangerous prospect in the field.
*shoot first revive second
*revive first shoot second
*revive first, retreat
*medpack drop behind pack
*pre-pack and shoot
*medic train
plenty of options available for players
I think those differences need to be bigger. If you got a preconceived plan then you should be able to bank on it and have an advantage as well as a disadvantage on people who just prefer to wing it in a balanced build.
The differences b/w each approach are massive gameplay wise.
I could go through them if you want,
Plans arent required, but battlesense and awareness are required.
Even for the easier approaches.
Holy **** what is with this guy not wanting people to learn how to be good at something? Give them stuff to be a good medic, give them stuff to be a good soldier… learn to be a good medic! Learn to be a good soldier! The stuff is already there, learn to use the equipment to it’s peak efficiency before asking for more.
I don’t see how that’s mutually exclusive. You first have to learn something and know where your talents lie in order to adequately pick a specialisation tree. Having a good idea of your qualities and flaws IS a skill as much as any other competency in a game.
If you don’t know what exactly you’re good at or -bravo!- if you’re good at anything then you’re best off with a balanced all-rounder build so you can be flexible and improvise a lot.
That’s how WoW works as well. Players who change talent builds will have to invest quite a bit of time to grow into it and become better at it. Mind you, that’s time placed on top testing whether or not certain builds are actually working out well enough.
The only time that I like customizable loadouts is when they work on a credit system. For example, buying stuff during the match in CS, the old Tribes games, Shadowrun, NS2.
While I generally don’t like cross-match XP and unlocks, I suppose you could do a permanent loadout system that also works with credit system. Some abilities could simply cost more than others…Maybe every player has 100 credits, and you use 60 of those on a great gun, which means you can’t buy the more powerful abilities because you’d only have 40 left. Or vice versa.
What I don’t like is loadout systems that just give you slots and you put anything from a category into that slot. The balance constraints make it too boring. You end up having to tone down powerful abilities or weapons, and nobody uses the weak abilities. The beauty of a vending system in games like Starsiege Tribes, is that you can make the weapons and abilities as powerful or weak as you want…and then you just price them accordingly.
But the reason I still sort of prefer restricted loadouts with no customization is that you can see any player in the game and instantly know what abilities they have. I believe that visibility increases the strategy ceiling substantially… for instance, I dislike fog of war in RTS because I think it actually lowers the strategy ceiling.
So, I think that ideally:
Best: Restricted loadouts with no customization - The focus is on interesting combination of abilities, balancing strengths and weaknesses (just like a fighting game character, or an RTS faction)
Second Best: If there must be an XP and cross-match loadout system, limit the customization not by a number of slots, but by the costs of each ability. Every player has the same number of credits to spend on their loadout, and weapons/abilities are priced based on their perceived balance. The developers simply make the weapons and abilities so that they feel right…and they don’t have to throw out interesting abilities because they are too weak. “Balancing” merely becomes the process of changing prices for things…not the weapons or abilities themselves.
[QUOTE=tokamak;408259]I don’t see how that’s mutually exclusive. You first have to learn something and know where your talents lie in order to adequately pick a specialisation tree. Having a good idea of your qualities and flaws IS a skill as much as any other competency in a game.
If you don’t know what exactly you’re good at or -bravo!- if you’re good at anything then you’re best off with a balanced all-rounder build so you can be flexible and improvise a lot.
That’s how WoW works as well. Players who change talent builds will have to invest quite a bit of time to grow into it and become better at it. Mind you, that’s time placed on top testing whether or not certain builds are actually working out well enough.[/QUOTE]
That’s not a skill, it’s common sense and NOT having your head buried in the sand or the mental state of a turnip. I know I’m not good at playing the piano, buying a program that plays most of it for me doesn’t help me get better… practice does. Shortcuts, fakery, regardless of knowing your weakness, the option is there to improve without some fake enhancement helping you pretend you’re better than you are… that’s just delusional grandstanding. “Hey I’m an awesome medic!”, no, your fake upgrades make you look better than you are and with them you’ll improve at a snails pace.
You first have to learn something and know where your talents lie in order to adequately pick a specialisation tree.
No need for trees.
The present moment determines which option one should use.
And the skill level, determines how narrow those options are.
It isn’t about planning, its about knowing.
Having a good idea of your qualities and flaws IS a skill as much as any other competency in a game.
Knowing what is required in the moment is more impressive, than working it out on paper.
If you know where you’re lacking then you know where you have to improve, a tick box in a UI won’t have any baring on this. If it takes ‘skill’ to know your good and bad points, then why is skill suddenly taking a back seat when it comes to improving yourself after this wonderful self analysis?
Then I don´t see your problem with banking on a specialisation within a class. Afraid that your role may become redundant at certain points? That would mean you don’t really know how to properly play that class-specialisation after all.
Merely picking the best option from a whole range available isn’t interesting. Having to pick from sub-optimal options because you went a different route is takes far more insight. On top of that, it also means you get situations where you’re in exactly the right niche at the right moment which would pressure you to make the absolute best of the advantages given to you. Either way, a player that can recognise those situations is rewarded under a system where he can specify a role, that layer gets completely lost if all options are available all the time.
If anything it seems youre afraid that the opposing players, have more options available than you.
Back on topic…
In regards to indoor medcrates:
I would also take away the ability to regen nades from it… This spices up the engies role on attack indoors, which usually only amounts to laying offensive mines that have no impact.
Just re-reading my post. Just realised it still doesnt solve the issue of engies being useless on attack, after the medcrate is constructed. The medcrate would need to grant the engie an ability of some sort. Perhaps poison mines, that reduce player speed but do zero dmg. And the medcrate would need to replenish them, so that the engie has something to do constantly.
Seems that you’re afraid that you can’t get by on your own laurels and need to rely on an artificial system to fill in the gaps that you can’t be bothered to fill yourself. The gaps are there whether there’s a check box for it or not, the option to focus your play style to fill those gaps or develop those areas are there whether you want to be purely support, purely offensive or in-between is there and always has been. If you need a system to tell you how to play, then I’m afraid it’s the player themselves that have become redundant if they can’t decide what type of player they want to be.
I have to agree with DA, the thing is, you’re not simply picking the best option from some list of all conceivable options, you learn as an individual that a certain class can operate a certain way without the game telling you, then using that knowledge, you apply that style of play to certain situations that call for it how you see fit. I don’t see the need for skill trees telling us what routes we can take, removes all sense of discovery and is basically telling us how we ought to be playing by forcing us to pick these silly sub specialisations.
Going back to rambo medics, players don’t just suddenly decide I’m a rambo medic now and instantly gain the ability to perform such a role. They learn the tools the medic has available to them and how to use them in order to be aggressive and deadly, they learn the maps inside out so they know the best spots to ambush players and have a safe retreat to heal up. Likewise to be an adequate support medics you have to learn to read the needs of the team and how best to respond to those needs. Both styles of play use the same equipment loadout, same HP, same ammo and such, you have to learn how to use that same class for different situations.