DIRTY BOMB UPDATE: Version 17437

(Valdez) #41

Is there any point to running an engineer on offense anymore?? (non escort map). What exactly is the point of having the soldier be the c4 planter? I have asked several of my friends in the alpha and they tell me its so that people will play the soldier. That just doesnt make sense to me, because now nobody will play the neer. why would SD want ppl to play soldier and not neer?? someone help me out here.

(INF3RN0) #42

I think some constructable and destructible side-obj/routes for offense would warrant the engy to be more than just a personal preference on offense. Otherwise yea, I don’t see them being too important to the team in that aspect.

(Nail) #43

well, there’s some obvious engi stuff untouched right now, like the “dirty” tunnels that need some kinda engi fix

(ImageOmega) #44

You don’t have to change to another then switch back. In-game, hit the “Home” key, then type “setres <insert your res here>f” and that will fix the mini map bugging out. (Example: “setres 1600x900f”) Next time you alt-tab out and in, Hit “Home”, up arrow, enter.

(Valdez) #45

Whats the reasoning for removing ammo from gibbed bodies if you are just going to put ammo boxes around every other corner on the maps? Anyone know??

(ImageOmega) #46

I think there’s one too many of those things now (at least on LB). I think there needs to be a way to promote class synergy better and wanting to work with a teammate. Make team synergy something that is desired by the players to maximize their potential, not just happen to be fighting in the same area together.

The Field Ops being the main resource of ammo making class synergy necessary is a valid solution instead of extra ammo boxes. Although, I know for the pub scene there is the great potential to not have any Field Ops being played and thus run out of ammo. Maybe the next step is to give engineers the ability to create ammo depots instead? That way there are two classes supplying ammo. I don’t know.

Valdez and I discussed some of these ideas tonight and one of the ideas, as much as I hate to admit it is needed, may be the simple solution that has just been avoided thus far.

(INF3RN0) #47

I was about to suggest making the ammo depot locations constructable by engineers. I’d think they would provide something like X amount of ammo or last for X amount of time before needing to be reconstructed. I’m not entirely sure where the best places to put these would be either, but definitely keeping them limited would be best. Also ammo depots themselves make more sense defensively, however it would be interesting to have the ammo spots near mid-points of most areas of engagement so that they could potentially be used by all sides. I just don’t really like the free unlimited ammo just sitting around the maps like it is now.

(nailzor) #48

But have to use a soldier to plant c4 to destroy :rolleyes:

(Valdez) #49

Are the current carryable mechanics staying in this game?? taking time to pickup, drop off and not being able to fire is terrible. I thought 95% of the people agreed these mechanics do not belong in a game like this.

(Whhaayy) #50

+1 totaly agree with that such mechanics are terrible for a shooter

(Valdez) #51

Waterloo terminus last phase needs to be totally reworked, that part is just an ffa, the two reactors just do not work. Sorry at this time I really do not have any ideas to fix it, will update when I do.

The change on the lift phase for whitechapel still doesnt work, would be better to just put a ramp on the defender side that only the defenders can get over the wall with. I am assuming the only reason you blocked off the right way for defenders was due to the offense team running down that side and spawn camping right? Also in the chapel itself, an mg42 does not fix poor map design (in the chapel), that is a band aid fix, please fix the real issue with the chapel.

(iwound) #52

stop rambo engies like me and my high kills. oh and laying a mine at a c4. frustrated the hell out of me as id gotten used to it being this way.
problem is soldier is a fat slow git with a fat arse so hes not the best at it like in QW. the guy needs to lose a few pounds. maybe that kin tent he carries round with all the time for absolutely no reason.

+1 i smells a poll precious.

(Hyperg) #53

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K71uwvWypSg :penguin:

For the first time yesterday, I felt like ppl grouped a bit more, exchanging ammo and hpax, etc. The lack of ammo drops certainly helped with teamwork. I’m up for trying the ammo cabinets or w/e (I liked the idea in ET with them appearing at the forward spawn capture positions), but carefully, not to trash the thin shred of team synergy we started having here :slight_smile:

Nice work on the mines and the shotgun, it feels like you need to work a bit more for your kills as an engy (it allows for that small time of reaction from the target).

I’m still getting the dead ghost broken mesh bug occasionally (dunno if this was one of the fixes with the system in the list).

Really nice job with Camden, it’s been a while since I’ve played the initial blocking of the map, it certainly matured a bit meanwhile, but with the last changes across the board, with the rest of the map layouts and tweaks, the “openness” gap between the map has been narrowed a bit. Camden is just “different” now, but without standing out as not-claustrophobic, as opposed to the rest. Maps overall certainly improved, good job.

(.Fleury) #54

Nice work. There are many more things that work out great in this build and only a few things i liked better in the previous build! I will explain myself later, not enough time now :slight_smile:

(nailzor) #55

The majority of the patch notes are good stuff and good improvements. Well except for adding the MG in the Chapel - seems like a bandaid attempt to try to give defense the edge :wink:

Below are some of my questionables after playing on new patch.

Imagine everyone on defense is dead, they have no visual of the C4 plant site(s) - but it does not matter - once they get back in sight of the objective they will know exactly which of the multiple C4 plants needs to be defused first. That should not be the case.

This makes this C4 objective part of the game way too easy-cheesy.

Well, I guess if you want the UI to look like this:

argh.jpg1280×720 179 KB

That is cool. Imagine with the new UI adding a few kills, assists and health pack pickups at the same time in this screenshot.

I’d prefer carryable and game information be as far away from my crosshair as possible. I mean… I am choosing to play a FPS game - why complicate the area around the most important part of my screen?

This just needs to be removed, there is no being nice around it anymore. It has been tested, that is great and dandy. Either remove them entirely or remove the delivery time.

Why not just remove acceleration altogether - players should just move a certain speed for each:

[ul]
[li]Crouched (why do I make noise while I move and crouch?)[/li][li]Not-Running[/li][li]Running[/li][li]Walking[/li][/ul]

Is this part of a force of gameplay to make more people play Assault? I am really confused since people played Assault just fine already, the Engineer has always been the blow-****-up specialist. Now the Engineer can not plant C4 but he can defuse it. The Assault player can’t defuse C4, but he can plant it. Seems like the developers are trying to force people to play Assault in the wrong way. Leave the engineer as the C4 + Turret/Mine specialist, there is no reason to change this to Assault.

  • Ammo bins
    What is with all the ammo bins on the maps? There is no reason to play Field-Ops except for the airstrike or artillery strikes to disable the EV on escort maps or have a bit of edge with long-range damage.

The game moved in the right direction of removing ammo drops from gibbed players, but at the same time took two steps back by putting ammo bins all over the maps, ensuring that teams can simply camp choke points with unlimited ammo. I veto to remove these bins entirely, it is removing the possibility of class synergy in regards to Field-Ops.

(Kendle) #56

I like the Soldier having C4, it provides a distinction between the guy who “makes” stuff (Engineer) and the guy who “breaks” stuff (Soldier), however it might help if there was more stuff for each to make and break, like ammo racks could start off being unavailable until an Engie constructs them, and allow the enemy Soldier to blow them up again. I’d also like to see more constructibles in general, like a ramp to get over a wall rather than (or as well as) the option to blow up the wall.

Agree that removing ammo drop and adding ammo racks doesn’t achieve much on the face of it but at least the F/Op has more of a role now as he’s more likely to be where the ammo is needed. Personally I’d like the F/Op to be the one and only source of ammo. I know the objection to this is what if the team doesn’t have a F/Op, but then I remember RTCW worked fine without ammo racks or ammo drop, why do today’s gamers need everything handed to them on a plate?

I’d still like to see more distinction between the primary weapons, an Assault Rifle should have a slower ROF and more damage IMO than an SMG (as in it already does, probably, but it should be even more of a distinction).

I’m also against the carry mechanics, on Camden it’s a real pain having to travel all that way and not be able to shoot while you’re doing it. You’re totally dependent on your team-mates (which is good) but you’re a gun down compared to the enemy (which is bad).

(Bangtastic) #57

Pistol to defend oneself while carry?

(.Fleury) #58

yeah like that 1

(Kendle) #59

That would be a nice compromise to try, you could be holding the item in one hand and pistol in the other. :slight_smile:

(Hyperg) #60

The pistol idea is nice, but it would mean enforcing it on classes which don’t carry a pistol as secondary.