Major issues i have with brink

(allure15) #1

Okay as you can tell I’m frustrated beyond belief. But Splash Damage you couldn’t convince me you fixed the A.I in the game. I’m day 6 with the security and It’s burning my skin.

Issue #1 in the final two minutes of the objective timer why is my team still trying to capture command post? Please tell me why? We are trying to win not lose. My team is not even trying to help me complete the objective. We have one good push and then it stops. I should be allowed to give orders to my team. Or have them group on me. I still think the A.I is focused on secondary objectives and not primary ones

Issue #2 why does it have moments where I can take a lot of damage, and other times I take one bullet and thast’s it?

Issue #3 Why in the blue hell, If I’m down and medic is next to me, is he going to the command post instead? His team mate should stop what he is doing and revive me?

Issue #4 Why don’t you have capture the flag or tag in brink that would just make soooo much sense with the S.M.A.R.T. system…You need more maps that can show the beauty of this system! TDM would be cool to I just would like to slide kick someone to win a match just saying…

Look I love this game, been a big fan of it, but It needs work you say you care about your fans and that your loyal, want to make brink an enjoyable experience but you not doing enough you need to do more. more wepons, maps, A.I fixes brink is a gold game but it’s not pure gold it needs to be refine please work on this!!

(zenstar) #2

What platform are you playing on? On PC I find medics will cross entire maps to come revive me if they have the pips to spare.

But yes, there is too much dicking about with the command posts by the AI sometimes (especially certain maps like the missile launch map). The whole “merges single player and multiplayer” thing just doesn’t really work. It’s an MP game. Bots are only there for a bit of practice but the game only truley shines in MP.

(Yes I know some people prefer to play with bots, but you’re in the minority. Doesn’t make your choice invalid, just not the popular choice.)

(Dormamu) #3

@allure15

#1 When you feel like you are hitting a wall try to switch to a support class. On some maps is it better to support the AI team rather than doing the objective.
One Example is Shipyard/Security, if you go as a engineer,cvops you will probably lose the match, but if you go as a soldier/heavy/gotlung/lobster-sidearm you will find it easy to complete even at level 24. (If we got the demo function we would go reverse engineering on them and see what make them tick that way. At the moment i think is the “class”+“time”+“your location on the map” that make them go berserk :D).

#2 most of the time this will happen if you are the first one to enter their cone/field of view (bots), what you are seeing is just one bullet, in reality their are more than one fired at the same time by more than one bots and hitting you at the same time (+/- 1/10/100/1000ms). This is why you fell like you are killed by 1 bullet (the last one to hit and kill you - mostly handgun/hs, assuming you are at full health when you die by “1shoot”).

#3 If an AI medic is out of pips, and the time to recharge is greater than the time it takes you to respawn, he will leave you there and focus on the next script it has (command post/support/etc.). You will find this scenario even on MP with humans :D.

#4 don’t know.

(wolfnemesis75) #4

#4.) How would they even have CTF with the different body types in terms of Heavy not be able to have access to all areas and Lights moving the fastest? How could it even be made to be remotely fair?

(SockDog) #5

This again? It’s like it’s theoretical physics or something. You either remove some of the elements that exist in Brink which would imbalance or prove pointless in a certain gametype or you rebalance them for that gametype. In CTF I’d imagine a heavy would make a good base defender or base clearing role. Classes I’d expect would just be removed and abilities made selectable.

(DarkangelUK) #6

If the heavy was designed as the juggernaut role he should be, then his place in CTF would be very obvious. He could still rely on his heavy weaponry to defend or clear the way.

(sereNADE) #7

is the consensus wolfnemesis75 is a troll or just missing half his brain? both?

(.Chris.) #8

Nah, just a bit short sighted.

When I first heard about SMART I instantly thought about CTF and my personal fave Powerball and how much it could add to the CTF gamemode and it’s variants, bang in 3 useful bodytypes and you’re onto a winner.

(BioSnark) #9

This won’t be a grand revelation to most PC players but the top played game on Steam has both ctf and classes with different movement speeds and levels of vertical mobility. The cinematic trailer for Brink = pure ctf chase scene.

(wolfnemesis75) #10

[QUOTE=sereNADE;376805]is the consensus wolfnemesis75 is a troll or just missing half his brain? both?[/QUOTE]I thought the consensus was you were. I know you are but what am I? Also, it was a fair question: I don’t think CTF fits in Brink at all without radically changing the game to make it generic. Put that in your pipe and smoke it!

(.Chris.) #11

Yeah, short sighted.

(DarkangelUK) #12

Stevie Wonder wants his walking stick back.

(sereNADE) #13

pure gold

i would argue ctf fits brink much better than the generic locked-point/animation objectives. ctf would improve the game without any radical changes whatsoever and would require a slightly smarter player to handle more dynamic conditions. ofc provided not everybody playing is a brain-dead stat whore.

if you want to talk about generic then yes, brink is not generic. it’s worse. it wants to break new ground but not without being extremely accessible. i’d say thats treading into quicksand. it borrows elements from its spiritual predecessors and cheapens them almost beyond recognition. if brink were at least generic there might actually be better weapon balance and have shipped with more launch-ready features. i’ve seen totally generic games with more lively pub and viable competition.

(BROTOX) #14

Well Brink has a one sided version of CTF… anytime you have to deliver something, that gametype is the closest thing. But in itself CTF is just an abstract exercise and would have to be put into a practical context for it to work in Brink.

As I’ve stated in my own thread, I don’t like how the game doesn’t let me play later parts of most of the levels as resistance because of the inherent imbalance of defending/attacking.

(montheponies) #15

simple fact is that the more gamemodes you have the greater the chance that you’ll attract a wide playerbase - provided of course that the core mechanics are sound…deathmatch, checkpoint and ctf will always cater for the masses and allow new players to migrate to the objective/stopwatch mode more naturally over time.

(SockDog) #16

I believe this was put in place to deal with actual team imbalances, such that if you got steam rolled and pinned at your spawn you’d only need to put up with it for five minutes rather than twenty or twenty five. Of course it doesn’t address the underlying issue of team imbalance and the fix sacrifices another tiny part of the game’s heart to do what it does.

I’ll shout again from the rafters, Dynamic handicaps! Simply granting a team that is pinned at spawn or not completing an objective a health boost, better weapons, extra abilities etc to fight against the clearly superior team would at least keep the game going, keep both sides engaged and playing without this need to mummy gamers and effectively rage quit on behalf of all the players.

(BioSnark) #17

Yes. The map design really got in the way of me enjoying that in Brink but it’s pretty good fun in SD’s previous games. It’s really completely different from the dynamic switching off of offense and defense depending on the situation and doesn’t have the same cat and mouse for the carrier. This is particularly true in Brink where the defense is centered on one end of the route, either at transmit or pickup, and doesn’t have time, opportunity or perhaps coordination to pursue/intercept once the carry objective leaves their area. I’d say terminal has the most room for this dynamic but the rest really don’t in my experience.

(sereNADE) #18

you run the danger of punishing players for coordination and effort. games that reward poor play and eliminate risk by granting “dynamic handicaps” tend to be wholly unfun, which is even less fun than being on a hopeless noob team stuck at first spawn.

(BioSnark) #19

I agree regarding health / damage buffs but having the spawn times slowly reducing for offense or increasing for defense as time ticked down on an obj would be fine by me. I can’t remember if they do that now in obj mode :X Wouldn’t help with spawn camping on some maps where the defenders just aren’t dying. Those need map changes.

(SockDog) #20

Sure there is an inherent danger with such a system but an imbalance in the teams either needs to be resolved or a handicap put in place. We certainly hear a lot about matchmaking but it has its own issues and relies upon a large pool of players to work effectively. The system Brink employs which is to just end the game before people rage quit is dealing with the end result not the root cause.

Granted in L4D you’re actually competing against a computer not another team but the AI’s ability to aid or punish players pretty much defines the game for the success it is. Remember handicaps need not be extreme nor handed out freely, the goal would be to use them to bring a level of challenge to both sides without tipping the core skill to be a minimal but deciding factor. For me at least having a close match, win or lose, is preferable to a catastrophic win or lose.