State of Play - Maps, maps, maps!

(Silvanoshi) #61

StinkBug.jpg1296x728
[/QUOTE]

Pffff, that bug ain’t nothing!

Enjoy

big-bug-1.jpg720x576

Awwww yeahhhh!!!

(stealth6) #62

Smallest kid I’ve ever seen.

(Glottis-3D) #63

I dislike that hack-objects are gone. This take away hacking proficiency for snipers. I thought you were all for proficiencies.

(BomBaKlaK) #64

Since few days I feel like the dev are talking on different posts, much more than before !
Nice move on the communication guys, we need it and I think we deserve it.
Dont let the last small community struggling without any news, Keep going this way.

(Nail) #65

deserve ?

The sense of entitlement around here is astounding, no one owes you jack

sometimes after reading some of these demanding posts

I just want to

give someone a high five

in the face

with a shovel

(Exedore) #66

Wow, that’s basically asking for it to be more like Brink, which we don’t hear often! It’s more that we want objective proficiency as a whole to be one, rather than splitting it up into different types. It’s more likely that in the future we’d maybe put out a long range character that has a Blowtorch and PDA…

(tokamak) #67

So we’re going to be seeing ‘objective’ type classes? I’m all for that for main objectives, just not for sides. That’s a really important distinction.

(Glottis-3D) #68

Why brink? More like ETQW? Engineers are the fastest in repair/build, while snipers are the guys for the hack. I never realy liked, that the whole hack went to engies in the first place.

(Exedore) #69

This is in the game already, though we don’t really use the notion of classes when we’re discussing things. Blowtorches and PDAs still provide an advantage on secondaries, but not nearly as significant as repaired/constructed secondaries can now be damaged to the point of being disabled.

(tokamak) #70

Yeah that’s what I don’t like. I mean, not the blowtorch and pda part, it’s great that the advantage is offered in a different way than just a speed boost.

What I mean is that I’d still like to see only specific mercs being able to perform specific side objectives. It doesn’t have to be confined to the traditional classes. I mean a binary requirement, some merc are able to repair or destroy a side objective and some can not.

I’d like to see this because this limit will make the game even more asymmetrical. Only certain mercs on one side of the team will be able to solve the problems that are created by only certain mercs on the other side of the team. This means that the way matches play out will start to vary much more than it does now.

It means that depending on the match-up, certain side objectives will be incredibly easy and some will be impossible to either start or stop. It’s not game-breaking like with main objectives, it just means that mercs will have an enormous impact on the flow of the match.

(rookie1) #71

Mercs that can do specific tasks that other can’t do ,make the game Class like.
Which a classless 'everybody can do it …don’t bother ’ can’t bring .
Class system tied the team to rely on each other …Thats building a strong team work .
Not depending on other encourage Lone wolf and would be like an Death Match …with objectives …if you ever feel to do some of them .
Im for Class specific for primaries objectives and Class specific for secondaries …We all rely on each other …not a free for all proficiency type

(MrFunkyFunk) #72

Nah I’m not that dedicated to DB anymore, sorry :wink:
Plus if you bring meaningful or important layout changes, like you said, it’s not a priority.

(spookify) #73

I find it unbearable to play in a Euro server with my ping. It is night and day to go into a USA Server and actually feel like you are hitting something.

I think all my frustrations with the game have come while in Euro servers…

I even notice a weird bullet reg lag in USA servers but in Euro servers its ridiculous…

We arent retaining USA players and especially with only one game mode and unbalanced maps and servers.

(Glottis-3D) #74

Yeah! Like blowing up with a c4 charge a door to the ladies’ rest room will only bring a passage to female mercs. Coz gentlemen are not allowed there…we’re in London after all…

(BomBaKlaK) #75

what a nice person … Yeah ! deserve ! Cause we are here since a long time without any vision of the game, with a big lack of communication and we paid to support this game ! So yes we deserve it. [/endofstory]

(Ashog) #76

I am playing exclusively Payday 2 nowadays (wonderful game!) and I must say, SD could learn a lot from the way how weapon system, weapon unlocks, achievements and map randomization is implemented there.

I think it would do a lot of good to the game if map obstacle/objective randomized placement / condition were implemented for pub play. For comp play these randomizations would have to be able to be turned off, of course, if needed. This is exactly what yields P2 a great load of replayability and virality. Very random map events. I totally love it. Doubt that Unreal engine allows such flexibility tho.

/back to P2

(tokamak) #77

It’s stopwatch, random side objectives and obstacles will have to be played by both side so there’s no issue there.

I think that, rather than random events, the objectives themselves should be dynamic enough to generate lots of different scenarios.

Like that level in Half Life 2 where you had to control a large crane with a magnet. There were many different ways to get through that part depending on what you decided to do with the huge magnet.

Now obviously that level of freedom would be insanely frustrating in a multiplayer game. But you could still have objectives linked together that, depending on the team’s choices create different permutations in the geometry.

(RasteRayzeR) #78

[QUOTE=tokamak;506033]
Like that level in Half Life 2 where you had to control a large crane with a magnet. There were many different ways to get through that part depending on what you decided to do with the huge magnet.[/QUOTE]

Funny, I suggested that only a few days ago in the new update thread about the maps. Though I never played HL2 (I know, it’s a shame). Would be great, and with a time penalty for changing which road is opened to change strategy

(tokamak) #79

Yeah it could be segmented rather than completely free.

Attackers:

  • Work the objective once, a container is lifted and one road is opened up.
  • Work the objective twice, the container is moved and lowered diagonally on some other container, opening up another route (but blocking a previous one)
  • Work the objective three times, the container is lifted into the air, removing the diagonal route, but freeing up the other two.

Then, depending on what may work best, the fourth move could get the whole thing back to square one, OR

  • Work the objective four times and the container is released from high creating a horrid mess and removing the objective entirely.

The difference is making the thing have a permanent finish or cyclical. Which one suits best depends on how long the objective has to be fought over. Cyclical would work if the crane was present over the entire map and linear would work if it was only one of the parts in the map.

Defenders:

  • Every time they work the objective it takes back one step.
  • A defender can ‘lock’ the control panel requiring a hacker to free it up for people to start meddling with it again.

That way you create a dynamic modular environment without everything going wacky.

Battersea actually sort of has a rudimentary way of incorporating this with the big moving crane that could lock up areas depending on how far they’re moved. It’s just that the actual impact this big transport thing has on the map isn’t really big.

(Glottis-3D) #80

And its a capture zone, so not interested.