The Biggest Issue With Dirty Bomb...

(onYn) #21

[QUOTE=PixelTwitch;511550]I just want to put it out there… Again…
I honestly feel the biggest problem with the Maps is actually down to the mode and the game itself.

You could put hundreds more hours into the mapping and force them to work with the current modes but that does not mean the game is fixed. I still feel a good game/mode makes most maps feel at least semi decent. The more restrictive the game mode the more restrictive the maps kinda thing. I would prefer that SD tries to fix the maps by fixing the mode and not the other way around. Especially if we want lots of diverse maps in future.

Movement, Respawns, Combat Ranges, Objective Placement, Objective Functionality and Weapon Mechanics are the REAL reason behind the poor maps imho, not the maps themselves.[/QUOTE]

Game experience is pretty much something that differs with personal taste. Because of that there is no better or worse way for a game to develop, and you can center the game around any given mechanic or set of game mechanics and it will be successful and fun to play as long as you work it out nicely. Because of that it is very true what you are saying, and yes you could change all the game mechanics and make them fit the maps giving a truly enjoyable game. But this approach is not only causing LOT more work but also isn´t utilizing properly what SD can do well and what not so well. Of course a innovative game is nice to have as well, but I don´t think that at any point it really was the goal to innovate like master blaze it 420, but rather innovate slightly in the frame of what they already know how to do.

(PixelTwitch) #22

Forcing you to play only Merc on attack and defence is what a call limited choice. For me 3 mercs are already limiting enough. A pick system like in MOBAs would bring other problems on the table.

Actually it really depends on what you consider to be a choice…
Having access to multiple Mercs in a team based environment (matchmaking and competitive) gives the illusion of choice. There are two main reasons for this, the first one being optimal choice, meaning that no matter how you look at it, one of the choices will always be “right” with the others being wrong. The second reason is lack of counter play, ironically giving people the ability to counter each other results in very few counters. An example would be let’s say I took a Sniper on the first objective of Bridge, your “choice” would be to counter snipe or take a Merc that counters the Sniper. If you did this I would naturally change to a counter that counters your counter. Eventually, this results in a very set meta game and very limited choices to be had. With a draft mode I have to make a choice to take a Sniper on Bridge knowing that on the final objective I am going to have a hard time or play it completely different to what you would do with a Fragger for instance. It also means that if I know Bitey is good with a Sniper, maybe we should pick the sniper first or ban it out to prevent that being a choice for him to make.

Real choice does not have a right or wrong answer. Do we take a field op class to stop the EV on White Chapel? This is not really a choice…

If you want a laid back video about this I recommend watching this…

//youtu.be/lg8fVtKyYxY

If you want to get more in depth then I recommend watching this on Game Theory…

//youtu.be/nM3rTU927io

Or this if you want to watch something on Game Theory that has simpler examples…

//youtu.be/M3oWYHYoBvk

All these videos are worth a watch…
Basically, Game Theory is all about removing the choice from choice in order to win…

Multiple abilities don’t exist for one merc, because that would destory the whole concept of having multiple mercs and selling them.

Right now as things stand I believe we are still suppose to be unable to actually buy Mercs…
Also what you are saying is really down to each persons preference here. I for one would much rather pay for a Merc that had a much greater impact and had more individuality than I would with the current selection. Also your reasoning is flawed by the simple truth that the vast majority of games that sell Heros, Legends and Characters do so with much greater impact with each. Also, I do understand that my wanting a draft mode is held back by the very limited options when it comes to Merc abilities currently. Not because it does not work but because playing the same Merc can get boring if all that Merc can do is throw a Molotov.

‘RAW SKILL’ is not something what I consider as bad.

Your whole posts sounds a bit like you are only here, because you want to create video content about it on youtube. If that is your only goal, it won’t be hard for you to say goodbye to DB, or? I mean there are plenty of FPS games coming out which will offer this. (No offence!)
For many others here it meant to be way more than that.

Actually, I really enjoy gaming. I also need to make video content. I was looking for a game I would both enjoy and be able to create content on as that is the best of both worlds for me. However, currently, Dirty Bomb does not look like its going to be workable for lots of content and I am certainly not having fun with it. I love the concept and hope that it will do well. You are right, there are lots of FPS games in the works that seems to be doing this whole Merc based idea better then Dirty Bomb but I want it to be Dirty Bomb that wins out. Problem is that after 6 months and with no end in sight, I don’t know if I can risk putting more time into Dirty Bomb without being confident in its outcome.

(Glottis-3D) #23

well, you have just discribed several map development stages.
all maps start with thoughts about Movement, COmbat Ranges, Obj placemetn and obj Types etc.

(PixelTwitch) #24

[QUOTE=Glottis-3D;511594]well, you have just discribed several map development stages.
all maps start with thoughts about Movement, COmbat Ranges, Obj placemetn and obj Types etc.[/QUOTE]

Yes, what I am saying though, is that due to the CURRENT Movement System, Respawn System, Objective Functionality, Objective Placement and Weapon Mechanics the maps need to be nearly flawless to even work semi decently. It would have been and still is possible to make changes to the systems and make the CURRENT maps just as decent as you could by changing the maps.

The difference between the two ways of doing it is that changing the systems means its going to be easier to create good maps with lots of diversity later on in the games development and continued content development after launch. Changing the maps and not the systems means its going to be just as difficult to make maps in future and they will likely be much worse than the alternative.

(Glottis-3D) #25

[QUOTE=PixelTwitch;511595]Yes, what I am saying though, is that due to the CURRENT Movement System, Respawn System, Objective Functionality, Objective Placement and Weapon Mechanics the maps need to be nearly flawless to even work semi decently. It would have been and still is possible to make changes to the systems and make the CURRENT maps just as decent as you could by changing the maps.

The difference between the two ways of doing it is that changing the systems means its going to be easier to create good maps with lots of diversity later on in the games development and continued content development after launch. Changing the maps and not the systems means its going to be just as difficult to make maps in future and they will likely be much worse than the alternative.[/QUOTE]

Movement System
clear map collisions, give more control to do tricks - air control, chainjumps. interaction between mercs.

Respawn System
counter defender’s advantage in layout(this includes traveltimes, not only crossfire, highground, MG nests etc) by disadvangate in spawnwave times.

Objective Functionality
bring back CLass objects, and re-introduce doc-run objects insta take.

Objective Placement
just putting more thought in layout and imagination will do the trick.

Weapon Mechanics
one word: Damage-per-second
balance weapons with dps so that TTK is LOGICAL always. TTK should differ in percents not in several TIMES.
introduce at last a nice projectile weapon.
introduce weapon combos (switching can give you advantage!!! if you are risky)

so…well… i kinda solved all the problems!! =)

(onYn) #26

The maps that you would expect to work with all the current game mechanics smoothly, will be probably kind of similar to ET maps. ET was mainly so successful because of great custom maps that were provided by the community. 1+1=2= I don´t see a problem with map supplies for the current build :slight_smile:

I just wonder what makes all the choices you are talking about necessary to be made at the beginning of the game - where many unpredictable situations are still about to occur. I say unpredictable situations because compared to other games that utilize draft modes and limit players to play a certain character DB would suffer various problems.

For example someone who picked a sniper is being shut down by the enemy sniper constantly, simply by being outgunned by a huge amount or maybe even just shut down by normal rifle users… So what is this player supposed to do then? Hang himself in game and surrender? Because the only way that you actually could get out of this sniper issue situation would be to suddenly become better at shooting. I would suggest to become better at positioning as well, but since we work with the idea of changing the game play according to the maps and not the other way around I have to assume that there won´t be any major positional additions for snipers on the current maps.

There also is nothing really the team can do to help him… Maybe they pause the game, stand up and give him a hug boosting his confidence but that´s about it… And considering that there isn´t only one objective where such a situation can occur but multiple objectives in a row (at least currently)…

I honestly can´t see how a proper “choice” can be made giving this circumstances and I am for sure not going to accept that someone who picked sniper thinking he can compete with the enemy sniper is simply screwed with no chances of actually really pulling back (besides some lucky shots here and there maybe) and by that loosing the game for his entire team… I don´t know if I want to see such choices being made and how interesting they are to watch… When I could see for example player B who isn´t actually knowing for sniping but has been practicing it lately and now shows of his new skills… or the entire team picking stronger melee mercs and go a path where the enemy sniper actually can´t hurt them… This decission still will be necessary but happen much more frequently making the game more interesting I would assume.

PS: Pixel I am sure you know the game “Smite”. I think that if you want to make the single draft mode work, you would need to move most of the game towards the “Smite” genre.

(tokamak) #27

Smite is a pretty awesome and addictive game. People are constantly complaining about balance but never about the fact that they can only pick one god for a match.

Each merc is versatile enough to play a whole match with it alone and not running into insurmountable problems. Even a sniper. If you can’t win on the snipe game you can be a huge asset with your scouting. Perhaps even more powerful even.

You’re still going into huge problems of course. But solving those problems is the real skill Pixeltwitch is talking about. All players will run into areas where their mercs can be incredibly weak. It’s the good players that know how to still kick ass despite that.

Imagine if these problems wouldn’t be there. Then you have a game where everyone is essentially the same. I feel that’s where the more classically oriented shooter players here really want the game to be heading.

[QUOTE=Glottis-3D;511597]Weapon Mechanics
one word: Damage-per-second
balance weapons with dps so that TTK is LOGICAL always. TTK should differ in percents not in several TIMES.
introduce at last a nice projectile weapon.
introduce weapon combos (switching can give you advantage!!! if you are risky)[/QUOTE]

DPS is derived from damage per tick and ticks per second, This works in mmorpgs where those two are the only variables, but in a shooter the weapons have much more variables and that means DPS is not a meaningful definition any longer.

(Glottis-3D) #28

[QUOTE=tokamak;511601]
DPS is derived from damage per tick and ticks per second, This works in mmorpgs where those two are the only variables, but in a shooter the weapons have much more variables and that means DPS is not a meaningful definition any longer.[/QUOTE]
quake does this job perfectly. i dont see any reasons for DB not to be able to do this.
they have different ideal ranges for all the weapons. different DPS (with quite a variety of dmg-per-tick and ticks-per-second)

(tokamak) #29

Quake definitely doesn’t balance their weapons on dps. This is because some of them are hitscan and some of them fire particles that behave differently.

Most DB weapons are hitscan (at least they behave as such). What makes DB even more complicated than Quake is that there’s many other variables on top of tick-rate and damage per tick. There’s recoil, both vertically and horizontally separate, there’s recovery, there’s spread, there’s spread bloom, there’s spread reduction, there’s reload time, there’s armour piercing and there’s damage fall-off over distance, there’s head-shot and body shot difference and I’m positive that many of these variables also have sub-variables and or modifiers.

Either way, that’s why balancing weapons on DPS doesn’t work.

And all of that aside, even if that was the way to balance them, then you’re still not taking all the different class abilities, merc properties and intended merc roles into consideration.

(Glottis-3D) #30

[QUOTE=tokamak;511615]Quake definitely doesn’t balance their weapons on dps. This is because some of them are hitscan and some of them fire particles that behave differently.

Most DB weapons are hitscan (at least they behave as such). What makes DB even more complicated than Quake is that there’s many other variables on top of tick-rate and damage per tick. There’s recoil, both vertically and horizontally separate, there’s recovery, there’s spread, there’s spread bloom, there’s spread reduction, there’s reload time, there’s armour piercing and there’s damage fall-off over distance, there’s head-shot and body shot difference and I’m positive that many of these variables also have sub-variables and or modifiers.

Either way, that’s why balancing weapons on DPS doesn’t work.

And all of that aside, even if that was the way to balance them, then you’re still not taking all the different class abilities, merc properties and intended merc roles into consideration.[/QUOTE]
it doesnt work, because it wasnt used =)

i probably meant balancing on finding perfect DPS for certain weapon range and weapon type (hitscan or projectile = i.e. different accurracies)

no weapon in quake is OP(not taking BFG into account). but in some ranges some are REALY much much more powerfull. thats what i meant. and since DB realy sticks to ranges - they need this kind of balance.

(onYn) #31

[QUOTE=tokamak;511601]Smite is a pretty awesome and addictive game. People are constantly complaining about balance but never about the fact that they can only pick one god for a match.

Each merc is versatile enough to play a whole match with it alone and not running into insurmountable problems. Even a sniper. If you can’t win on the snipe game you can be a huge asset with your scouting. Perhaps even more powerful even.

You’re still going into huge problems of course. But solving those problems is the real skill Pixeltwitch is talking about. All players will run into areas where their mercs can be incredibly weak. It’s the good players that know how to still kick ass despite that.

Imagine if these problems wouldn’t be there. Then you have a game where everyone is essentially the same. I feel that’s where the more classically oriented shooter players here really want the game to be heading.[/QUOTE]

Let me go through this quickly:

  1. I never said Smite would be a bad game - just that DB would have to become kinda more like it if we want a reasonable single draft mode.

  2. Let´s say they are versatile enough do go through multiple objectives, what I don´t see happening since the needs for every single person switch so drastically depending on objective and game progress, that I find it hard to imagine a way where I could argue to pick A over B. But ok, so they are in fact versatile enough what would they do to the game then? I think that any kind of progress will become even less predictable and a mass basically. Let´s say 13 minutes is a good time for an attack. But with everyone “glued” to one merc this time will be much harder to tell, and be different from game to game depending on how the picks went.
    Also the balance of the objectives, that I think should be spread even across the map will be way off. Instead of seeing 3 main objectives you will most likely see 1 main objective - where the defending team invested most of there picks for, and 2 side objectives where both teams just will try to utilize what they have… And the chance of a full hold is just much higher then.

  3. There will be still huge problems even for people who pick the 100% accurate merc, since there is an entire game filled with problems that respawn every 16 seconds or so. And just because there are mercs better or worse suited doesn´t also mean that the best possible will be picked allways… there literally are people who will snipe you on close combat regardless too, so you will see player also making mercs work at situations they shouldn´t anyway.

  4. I think most of us want the classes to be back in order to be NOT the same anymore.

(PixelTwitch) #32

Let’s quickly look at the one constant here…

Everyone wants Stopwatch to change, just in different ways.
We can argue till the cows come home and achieve nothing.
Let’s just do something…

(fragon89) #33

I started to play this game more than a year ago, yes there were flaws but game felt simple and had a potential, so every time we had bad patch many like me said “ahh nvm… it still can be a good game, ill wait for more patches” but we wait and wait and wait and nothing happens.

I developed a theory… Enemy Territory supposed to be a sequel of RTCW… company thought it was a failure and released it for free…turned out a greatest success, and game was maintained mostly by community and modders. since then the company tries to repeat the success of ET with huge failures…(for qwers over here, QW wasnt that successful compared to ET, not even close). My conclusion is SD have not clue why ET was successful…If you’ve made something and u think its big failure not even worth of selling and it turns out huge success and after all that u try to repeat your steps without success means u have not ****ing clue…
good companies who made great success games renewed their game with minimal touch and tried to game be similar as the successful one.
blizzard with SC1 and SC2
valve with CS over the years…(game w\o ironsights, but company had enough balls to stay with their agenda and not trying abit from everything)

Now for the topic, For 1 year i had maybe 2-3 patch i would say “its in right direction”, I tried to play a week ago and it was bad…
the future of this game is Combat arms…nexon-fps-pay-to-kill game.

btw from last year games (with upcoming COD and some changes on BF4) fast movement and unique movement is back, I can ensure if this was “renewed ET, with modern features” People wouldnt reject it asap.

(Seanza) #34

I thought you weren’t focussing on this game anymore?

(INF3RN0) #35

Issue with everything on the forum is that people approach everything the same way that they did in a previous game, which just doesn’t work. This stuff is pretty simple. OBJ mode is basically designed around failures; imbalanced teams, contempt for maps, short attention spans, etc. SW is a much more fair mode, but then of course if there’s all the previously listed issues, then it’s just not fun for anyone. Now if you did want a more ‘fun’ oriented mode, then I’d say campaign mode does it the best. Campaign mode essentially works like a best 2/3 SW game, except you’re only playing each map once, switching A/D between maps, and then determining the overall win based on total maps won. It’s where the narrative stuff becomes more appealing, versus SW which is much more competitively oriented. Overall I’d say that execution is the best fitting to the game in its current state simply because everything would fall into an SnD style mode better than anything else currently.

The meta game would need a lot of revisions for SW to work well though. That means a lot more significant side objectives being used to propagate dynamic map flow, layouts that compliment that motive, more interesting cooperative team mechanics, more interesting objective mechanics, etc. Repetitive frustration is not entertaining, and the issue here is that every spawn wave feels like a repetitive grind.

(Brinkman) #36

Hey everyone. Long time no see. I felt like checking back with this game and was confused when the site and everyone around here referenced to the game as Dirty Bomb. I last knew it as Extraction and before that, Dirty Bomb. Confused as hell, I found a news article on the name change.

Like most in this thread, I stopped playing once the game was sold to Nexon and turned into a mess of MOBA classes and characters. It lost all sense of W:ET that the game started out with. I still see no real reason to come back to the game unfortunately. Talk about a game that has been abandoned by the development team, slapped around by a South Korean hosting company, and left out to dry by fans. I’m guilty of the last part of that.

Let’s get 5 classes back, some core maps, and solid gameplay. Charge $10-20 for the game and leave all micro transactions to the candy crushers out there.

(prophett) #37

[QUOTE=Brinkman;511951]
Let’s get 5 classes back, some core maps, and solid gameplay. [/QUOTE]

I feel like the game had more depth then.

(warbie) #38

It’s too late for that. We’re either going to end up with something groundbreakingly game-changing that defines a new fps subgenre, or Homer’s car.

(Silvanoshi) #39

To be fair…who WOULDN’T want this thing of beauty?

(tokamak) #40

That episode is basically why I keep on reminding myself that SD are still the guys who created ET and ETQW and that demanding stuff left and right usually doesn’t lead to beauty.