The only objection is the inability to shoot while carrying. This makes no sense at all to me.
Regarding what Samurai mentioned about instant return of objective by defense - I personally think it is better to keep both timeout and manual interaction return (very short interaction) as now. This makes the life of defenders not so easy compared to if it were instant return. This adds more spice to the game, so it is good as is. The same with ineract taking of objective.
Regarding the mines - agree with most people, mines better be manual arm on the spot (not in hands), because 1) it will make engie more vulnerable as a price for easy minefrags 2) at the same time will allow to arm the mines everywhere (walls objects, even low ceilings, of course only if the mines become sticky). One might say, hey, why then not arming the mines in the hand, then throwing the sticky everywhere? Because 1) it will be too easy to stick it on higher ceilings which will be op 2) because it will make engie less vulnerable while arming (remember weapon switching is fast in this game)
So yeah, need sticky proximity mines. Also as other mentioned, a tripmine type would also be great to be able to place with alt-fire (or e.g. IS).
And iwound old tart will survive because I decided to buy a wheelchair for him (they are currently on discount here)
I also am in strong favor of a short manual arming time. I wouldn’t mind the same for turrets as well to be perfectly honest. I don’t think anyone likes it when someone just suicide drops a mine or a turret and it ends up getting a kill. Mines and turret dropping usually feels incredibly mindless and easy, but having to arm them manually would make people think about whether it was a good time to do so or not.
Medic Regen packs = Bad because you have to stop and wait to regain health.
Engineer Mine Priming = Good because you have to stop and prime it to use it.
I know these aren’t quite the same thing but I’m confused as to how one is seen as a game destroying thing, slowing everything down and the other is the pinnacle of tactical play. Seems to me I could easily say that running balls out into the enemy with a medic showering you in medpaks is mindless, easy and cheap too.
[QUOTE=Ashog;431745]smells.
And iwound old tart will survive because I decided to buy a wheelchair for him (they are currently on discount here) :)[/QUOTE]
Not exactly thrilled with the new patch. Most of this stuff has been said. shotgun is now OP, mines are terrible, visual changes to whitechapel / waterloo are very bad and can barely see now. The whole carryable changes I do not like. Map changes to the last phase of waterloo make it even more impossible to defend, on that last stage where in the hell are you supposed to defend the back reactor??? Map change to white chapels lift phase are also very bad, it was already hard enough to defend the lift phase now its impossible, no point in even attempting to leave your spawn. I feel like this patch has degraded the game as a whole. Really all you guys need for competitive to succeed is, just keep everything simple and have great map design, right now this does not seem to be the way the game is heading.
I think we should just have a competitive version of this game and a pub version. Make the comp version basic (kiss method), have the basic 5 classes (would be interested to try a RL/panzer). For the pub version feel free to introduce a variety of different loadouts with all types of COD spam type stuff (pubbers love these things). I just feel like if you try to keep introducing new things it will be impossible to balance. Also maybe when designing these maps, can you guys ask yourself where would I (you) setup a 5 man defense, or offensively how would we be able to successfully attack an area.
side note ill be spending more time with the gf this week, let me know when they revert to the last patch.
[QUOTE=Valdez;431773]Really all you guys need for competitive to succeed is, just keep everything simple and have great map design, right now this does not seem to be the way the game is heading.
I think we should just have a competitive version of this game and a pub version. Make the comp version basic (kiss method), have the basic 5 classes (would be interested to try a RL/panzer). For the pub version feel free to introduce a variety of different loadouts with all types of COD spam type stuff (pubbers love these things). I just feel like if you try to keep introducing new things it will be impossible to balance. Also maybe when designing these maps, can you guys ask yourself where would I (you) setup a 5 man defense, or offensively how would we be able to successfully attack an area.[/QUOTE]
I think the problem is more so that they are trying to edit already completed maps, trying to close down less trafficked areas and get the action focused. The problem is I think some of the ideas are shortsighted since they conflict with certain objectives on the maps. That back plant location on Waterloo is a great example and the changes to the lift area on White Chapel is another perfect example. Once the attacking team locks down that lift area (which is what they’re suppose to do) it is going to make it near impossible for the defense to stop the opposition since the defense will be choked into fire from that high rise in the middle and the surrounding blind side. Definitely, both sides of the coin (attack/defense) need to be considered when making additions and at every stage (each objective point) of the map.
As far adding to the game I definitely am with the KISS method. Simple works because simple does not involve cluttered ideas (especially ones that become a headache to balance). I definitely understand DB needs additions that make it stand out from other shooters, but the basic fundamentals should be flawless first. How long have people been asking for changes to the base movement speed? How long have people been asking for getting rid of the delay in strafing left/right? Are these things on the agenda as well? Or, are these requests ignored because it is not in line with the goals of DB? Or, is the intent to keep the gameplay slower thus easier for the less experienced gamers? If those last two things are the case then we are lowering the skill ceiling tremendously.
[QUOTE=Valdez;431773]I think we should just have a competitive version of this game and a pub version. Make the comp version basic (kiss method), have the basic 5 classes (would be interested to try a RL/panzer). For the pub version feel free to introduce a variety of different loadouts with all types of COD spam type stuff (pubbers love these things). I just feel like if you try to keep introducing new things it will be impossible to balance. Also maybe when designing these maps, can you guys ask yourself where would I (you) setup a 5 man defense, or offensively how would we be able to successfully attack an area.[/QUOTE]Please no. People HAVE to stop with the comp vs pub mindset. It is ONE game. Competitive games are successful mainly because of the following. Stream viewers = $$$
People want to watch a game that they fully understand and play. Look at League of Legends and Starcraft 2 (arguably the two most popular esports at the moment). In each game, the competitive played games are for the most part the same as pub games. This leads stream viewers to feel more connected to what they are watching. They understand what is going on better, because they’ve played what the pros are playing.
It also leads to the pro scene influencing the players less skilled than them. This generates more interest in the pro scene, because you can pick up strats and tips from the players. You can learn from the players to better improve yourself. It also allows “pub players” to practice and jump right into the competitive scene. There’s no fancy hoops to jump through or things they have to learn or relearn.
The game will not be nearly as successful if there is a “comp mode”. It just splits your community and alienates potential stream viewers. Stream viewers are what will ultimately determine the success of the competition scene.
Or add server settings which can limit and/or turn off in game features.
For example, if I was hosting a server right now:
I’d limit engineers to maximum of 2 per team because of the game-mechanic abuse of a 5 engineer EV push on Offense phase 1 of London Bridge and Whitechapel. (and I’d turn off mines, etc etc =p)
Having the ability to change settings post-release will allow comp leagues to enforce their “laws” to ensure the game is played as balanced as possible. When DB starts getting more player base and the 5v5 or 6v6 action starts to improve then it will further test maps and game design.
As it stands, there is much room for improvement as can be seen in the multiple threads by the small amount of players alpha has.
Just posted some bugs/feedback on the carryable objectives, posting here also for cross-reference.
[QUOTE=Mustang;431806]Some of these are bugs, others feedback…
To be honest I would expect that both quick knife and secondary fire should be melee.
Would like to see primary fire throw a little further.
Pick-up/deliver times seem to be map dependent, they should be consistent over all maps.
Based on the Camden:
Delivery time, it could do with being longer (somewhere in the 50%-150% extra time range)
Auto-return time needs to be longer to encourage defenders to return and to allow attackers to drop it for a firefight then pick-up again without having to run back to it’s respawn location
Defender return time is probably alright, maybe could be a little longer, more testing required
Pick-up time is far too annoying, it would be much better if pick-up was instant upon running over
There should be a HUD icon to indicate an item is being carried
Several people have suggested that primary weapon should be usable whilst carrying, personally I don’t mind if it is or not, but I’d like to try with at least sidearm being usable, then you are forced to either try your best with the sidearm and retain mobility, or drop the objective to use primary and have to camp/return to it, this combined with longer auto-respawn times (mentioned above) would be fine, at least it should be tried[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Anti;431592]Can you give some examples of how you would have used the old mechanic? Interested to know because I can’t think of very many.
Are you suggesting we validate the gameplay changes in patches with the opinions of a small group of QA testers rather than the several hundred closed alpha players from the target audience? I don’t like the sound of that idea.
Don’t get me wrong, I absolutely value our QA tester’s opinions on the game, but their primary role is to test game functionality. The reason the closed alpha exists is so that we don’t have to depend on a small sample of opinion from players at the office.[/QUOTE]
I understand what you are saying but their are some things that really shouldn’t make it to us. This patch was definitely one of them. You might as well just add the panzer now so we can get all the 1HK/explosive spam **** tested in 1 shot and not have to deal with something this halacious ever again.
Between Arti’s, Shotguns, and Mines this game is very CoD’ish right now and completely unenjoyable. You could at least have rotated out the Lt class for the mine spam.
[QUOTE=SockDog;431628]I like this train of thought, it means firefights are largely decided by a single pool of health. Players need to know when to take cover and heal or die and wait for a revive. In short it stops players with super accurate aim being fed packs and destroying the other team, now they need to withdraw one way or another.
On LB this was working well, both teams were clearing the the area for the carry objective it just seems the pickup mechanic is broken which is currently hindering the attackers taking advantage of the pickup. With that fixed I’d like to see how this plays out over time.
I’m also sure the medic’s inability to be one of those super accurate players and self heal mid fight is causing a lot of the backlash, I have no pity for these people losing their advantage, how sad you now need to fight 100hp vs 100hp.[/QUOTE]
I couldn’t disagree more. If a player is better than another player than he should absolutely be able to crush as many people as he can until he runs out of ammo or puts himself in a bad position.
Fighting 100 vs 100 was never the problem, like Inferno, you’re borderline retarded. The problem is medics need 4+ headshots to kill someone while every other class only needs 3. That innately puts medics at a disadvantage for a 1v1. To compensate we could use health packs. That has now been taken away as well. So what you’re going to see is a lot of players no longer playing medic because the class is boring and can’t kill anything in a genre based off killing.
In addition to that, their is so much explosive spam in the game now that the med packs will get their HoT knocked off.
It’s apparent that you have a disliking of competative players expressing their dominance on your face. That doesn’t mean you need to pitch bad advice or potentially ruin the game because you can’t aim.
[QUOTE=Bananas;431785]Please no. People HAVE to stop with the comp vs pub mindset. It is ONE game. Competitive games are successful mainly because of the following. Stream viewers = $$$
People want to watch a game that they fully understand and play. Look at League of Legends and Starcraft 2 (arguably the two most popular esports at the moment). In each game, the competitive played games are for the most part the same as pub games. This leads stream viewers to feel more connected to what they are watching. They understand what is going on better, because they’ve played what the pros are playing.
It also leads to the pro scene influencing the players less skilled than them. This generates more interest in the pro scene, because you can pick up strats and tips from the players. You can learn from the players to better improve yourself. It also allows “pub players” to practice and jump right into the competitive scene. There’s no fancy hoops to jump through or things they have to learn or relearn.
The game will not be nearly as successful if there is a “comp mode”. It just splits your community and alienates potential stream viewers. Stream viewers are what will ultimately determine the success of the competition scene.[/QUOTE]
You can’t compare top downs to an fps. SC2 has 2 modes as well. Custom and League/Ladder play. Casuals play customs competitive players play league it’s 2 different communities.
Better or has medkits showered all over them to keep them in the fight? How is that PvP? It’s not, is it? It’s more dependant on which team is better able to keep those players alive. That’s what we’re discussing, moving the emphasis more to players fighting against other players on a more even basis. Making the healing process something outside of the fight.
Fighting 100 vs 100 was never the problem, like Inferno, you’re borderline retarded. The problem is medics need 4+ headshots to kill someone while every other class only needs 3. That innately puts medics at a disadvantage for a 1v1. To compensate we could use health packs. That has now been taken away as well. So what you’re going to see is a lot of players no longer playing medic because the class is boring and can’t kill anything in a genre based off killing.
Yup, we’re both retarded because we can see things from multiple perspectives and are grounded in reality rather than selfish desires. Herp Derp indeed.
Ahhh <sniff sniff> do I smell a unemployed rambo medic in the house? Why not simply suggest the medic’s weapon be tweaked? Are all classes meant to be even? A medic still has the ability to withdraw and regen as they please unlike other classes. Again, I wonder if the change is the problem or an inability for people to accept change.
It’s apparent that you have a disliking of competative players expressing their dominance on your face. That doesn’t mean you need to pitch bad advice or potentially ruin the game because you can’t aim.
I don’t dislike the players or the concept, it’s the condescending attitude that I find ridiculous, that only a competitive perspective is required to make a game successful and the all out tears, tantrums and insults that get thrown any time such a person is not given enough attention or get what they want. You know, like calling people retards or thinking they can’t have an opinion because they’re worse at aiming than you.
I get what you’re saying but I still don’t think that’s going to work. The HoT would need to stay active even if you take damage. Basically, if you revive in a heated battle, you know playing the “support” role all you kids want. You can’t even heal the guy because he will just get sprayed and killed again, and again, and again, because you will never get more than 5 hp of healing.
Yup, we’re both retarded because we can see things from multiple perspectives and are grounded in reality rather than selfish desires. Herp Derp indeed.
Retarded because you make suggestions without looking at the bigger picture.Without even thinking about how it affects other elements of the game.
Ahhh <sniff sniff> do I smell a unemployed rambo medic in the house? Why not simply suggest the medic’s weapon be tweaked? Are all classes meant to be even? A medic still has the ability to withdraw and regen as they please unlike other classes. Again, I wonder if the change is the problem or an inability for people to accept change.
I did weeks ago. I said you either make it a HoT or you nerf the weapon but you don’t do both because the class will be painful to play and it won’t be enjoyable at all. I also thanked SD when they nerfed the medic gun and not the health packs and I felt medics were fine at that point. Then they took it a step further and nerfed the packs as well. You’re right, medics can run back and heal, that’s all they will do now tap tap tap a few times, run away, heal, come back and finish. Did it fix the problem? No, it just takes longer and makes the game boring and tedious.
I don’t dislike the players or the concept, it’s the condescending attitude that I find ridiculous, that only a competitive perspective is required to make a game successful and the all out tears, tantrums and insults that get thrown any time such a person is not given enough attention or get what they want. You know, like calling people retards or thinking they can’t have an opinion because they’re worse at aiming than you.[/QUOTE]
SC2
CS 1.6
League of Legends
DoTA 2
Q3
All the games were built competitively, applied the KISS mentality, and are extremely successful (SC2 isn’t exactly simple but it was built from the ground up for competitive play.)
Aim has nothing to do with my opinion of you. It’s when you suggest moronic ideas without looking at how it affects the elements of the game, specifically competitive play. You want to get a positive KDR with minimal effort? Go play CoD, they made that game for people like you. SD is trying to make a game that will last and us “condescending assholes” want to help get them there.
[QUOTE=strychzilla;431825]You can’t compare top downs to an fps. SC2 has 2 modes as well. Custom and League/Ladder play. Casuals play customs competitive players play league it’s 2 different communities.[/QUOTE]That’s not a good example. Customs are almost like a game inside a game. It would be fair to call some customs separate games.
Not all players who play ladders are competitive either. I guess it depends on what your definition of “competitive” is. When I play League of Legends, am I competitive? Yes. Would I try to compete in events/tournaments? No. I know plenty of players have this attitude.
Comparing a top down to an fps can be done for some aspects, especially competitive aspects. Looking towards the currently successful competition games is a good way to figure out what has to happen. I don’t like how you dismiss most of the points with you can’t compare the games. It’s not a very good way to voice your opinion, which I would like to hear.
Edit: I don’t think Riot intended for League of Legends to become so competitively successful. Saying it was built from the ground up to be competitive seems a bit misleading. Especially since they simplified MOBA aspects which could be considered “competitive”.
EditEdit: Calling people names just makes you look foolish and makes people dismiss your opinions. Keep it civilized everyone. We’re trying to discuss stuff, not “win” arguments (which is entirely impossible).
[QUOTE=strychzilla;431851]
SC2
CS 1.6
League of Legends
DoTA 2
Q3
All the games were built competitively, applied the KISS mentality, and are extremely successful (SC2 isn’t exactly simple but it was built from the ground up for competitive play.)[/QUOTE]
Somewhat off-topic, but there’s a little revisionist history here as two of those five games (CS 1.6, Q3) were absolutely never developed with a focus on competitive players in the context of e-sports or clan play. CS grew out of a desire to introduce elements of realism to shooters, as Navy Seals Quake and Action Quake 2 did, and had no features to facilitate clan matches (and even had some really gimmicky stuff like driving vehicles in the map early on).
Q3 made pretty big gameplay concessions to slow the pace down, and make the game easier by weakening weapons, slower player movement/different physics, and simplifying the armor system, with the full expectation that modders would change the game more challenging and acceptable to players wishing to compete, which mods like CPMA certainly did. That both games shared qualities that make a good game to compete on are inconsequential to their design goals.
The other 3 arguably are a result of very large playerbase descended from a previous game, both competitive and casual. You can’t simply look to emulate them to be successful, as games don’t exist in a vacuum. There are very much cultural reasons in addition to the games themselves as to why they have attracted the attention they have.
[QUOTE=sponge;431882]Somewhat off-topic, but there’s a little revisionist history here as two of those five games (CS 1.6, Q3) were absolutely never developed with a focus on competitive players in the context of e-sports or clan play. CS grew out of a desire to introduce elements of realism to shooters, as Navy Seals Quake and Action Quake 2 did, and had no features to facilitate clan matches (and even had some really gimmicky stuff like driving vehicles in the map early on).
Q3 made pretty big gameplay concessions to slow the pace down, and make the game easier by weakening weapons, slower player movement/different physics, and simplifying the armor system, with the full expectation that modders would change the game more challenging and acceptable to players wishing to compete, which mods like CPMA certainly did. That both games shared qualities that make a good game to compete on are inconsequential to their design goals.
The other 3 arguably are a result of very large playerbase descended from a previous game, both competitive and casual. You can’t simply look to emulate them to be successful, as games don’t exist in a vacuum. There are very much cultural reasons in addition to the games themselves as to why they have attracted the attention they have.[/QUOTE]
This may be so, but I think its more that it evolved with the player communities and got to a point where it became solid for competition. It even spawned things such as Quakecon.
The point should be look at how these games ultimately ended up… The driving force became the community and competitive play, shouldnt a note be taken from that?
