News: PC Gamer Article The anatomy of a Battle

[Warborn]

I'd be really surprised if MAXs required anti-vehicle weapons to kill this time around. No spawn timer and taking up a generic passenger seat says to me they'll just be durable but very killable with even light arms like SMGs.

[texico]

I thought it was a neat move that surrounding territory is now useful - an example they mentioned was being able to reduce cap times on a facility.

One thing I liked about Higby's points was that it shows that he understood that battles are organic player-driven systems. All you need to do is set down some variables, and the playerbase will react to their environment to produce the battle. They'll figure out ways to use the variables in place to gain an advantage over the enemy and take control of the battle, and they don't need to be spoon-fed a system of events that need to occur to win.


However, it also leaves me banging my head, because why didn't they apply this same logic to the good'ol inventory system??

Originally Posted by Higby

"Within the last few months we recognized that this was a mistake and said, “There shouldn’t be arbitrary rules that are getting in the way of me winning, there should be lots of ways to solve a load-out configuration.” A load-out configuration should be simple from a game mechanics perspective, it should be a very, very simple construct. And it becomes very complex, because people use it in ways that make it have multiple ways to solve. Multiple ways to solve using it for defense, multiple ways to solve using it for attack. And let players do that stuff. Players are the thing that is keeping you from winning, not game mechanics."

Hmmmmmm.

[dsi]

Originally Posted by texico

I thought it was a neat move that surrounding territory is now useful - an example they mentioned was being able to reduce cap times on a facility.

One thing I liked about Higby's points was that it shows that he understood that battles are organic player-driven systems. All you need to do is set down some variables, and the playerbase will react to their environment to produce the battle. They'll figure out ways to use the variables in place to gain an advantage over the enemy and take control of the battle, and they don't need to be spoon-fed a system of events that need to occur to win.


However, it also leaves me banging my head, because why didn't they apply this same logic to the good'ol inventory system??




Hmmmmmm.

Old inventory system was so simple (unless you don't know how size works I guess) & organic, why is the new one so clinical and restrictive?

[SniperSteve]

I think they are worried about specific builds being OP. (IE: Armor Repair, Heal, Heavy Assault, Advanced Hacker, Mossie)

[Sirisian]

Originally Posted by dsi

The amount of change they made gives me hope for them fixing tanks etc

I know what you mean about fixing the Vanu fixed turret design. I guess we'll have to wait and see if they move it up, but they already showed off a few pictures of it so it might be more set in stone than we think.

[Trihenketops]

Originally Posted by SniperSteve

I think they are worried about specific builds being OP. (IE: Armor Repair, Heal, Heavy Assault, Advanced Hacker, Mossie)

Yep. By providing set classes they can balance more things better, and as a result can introduce a wider overall range of playstyles. I'm not going to say the class system doesn't restrict at all, because it does, but from what it sounds like is that these classes are all dynamic and customizable to fit a spectrum of playstyles.

That said, this has already been discussed a lot.

[Sifer2]

Originally Posted by Warborn

I'd be really surprised if MAXs required anti-vehicle weapons to kill this time around. No spawn timer and taking up a generic passenger seat says to me they'll just be durable but very killable with even light arms like SMGs.

Yeah that would suck though. We already have Heavy Assault guys. A MAX should be a damn MAX. More vehicle than man. I think they should take resources to pull, and should have limited slots in transports again. Should definitely need armor repairs too.

I wouldn't be against the idea of them being more vulnerable to small arms fire if it would help balance indoor combat. But in general if one dude turns a corner an meets a MAX and all he has is his Rifle he should be ****ed.

[cellinaire]

Originally Posted by Sifer2

I agree that was the biggest flaw of PS1 before the BFR's were ever introduced IMO. And while i'm sure PS2 will be fun for at least a few months from newness I don't see where they have really improved in this area. In fact they made it worse with the uncapturable footholds.

I know there are some kinds of people that have a high tolerance for repetition. The kinds of people that still play the same map in Battlefield 2 for over a decade, and enjoy themselves. But other people don't want to fight the same fights every night forever.

Maybe this will get better down the line if they introduce more planets, and EVE style elements.

I don't know how many times these topics have already been brought on in this forum, but I'd wager these are worth a separate thread.

[TerminatorUK]

I think the MAXs this time around will act much more **** a 'Heavy' in Tribes - slow and lumbering but good armour and powerful weapons instead of a solider/vehicle hybrid.

They may have designed the class to act much more as a heavy infantry unit that can ride in most vehicles and doesn't have autorun or specifically high durability against small arms fire / vulnerability to AV.

[ringring]

Frankly if you can organise 5 gals and fill them with 50 maxes then good luck to you.

[Mirror]

Originally Posted by ringring

Frankly if you can organise 5 gals and fill them with 50 maxes then good luck to you.

Azure Twilight, Sturmgrenadier (sp??), Dark Skyyes to name a few that could probably do it. I just hope we have many effective options to take maxes down quickly. Deci-hotswapping will hopefully make a return

[Crator]

Originally Posted by ringring

Frankly if you can organise 5 gals and fill them with 50 maxes then good luck to you.

Don't think it will be as difficult as it was in PS1. The main reason is because you now have spawning at a GAL and squad leader spawning. In PS1 you had to tell everyone where to go to meet up to load the GAL. Those folks had to know where you were talking about and also had to go to an equipment terminal to get the correct load-out before meeting up at the GAL.

Has it been confirmed if you can bind to a GAL for respawn purposes?

[Raymac]

Maybe it's just me, but I have been in a number of failed Max Crashes, and I've been on the successful defending side against a ton of them as well. I was always a fan of using them and fighting them off and they were never an "auto-win". However, anytime you brought large numbers to bear of any kind of unit in a coordinated effort, you tipped the scales in your favor.

This also brings up an exciting thing for me. We invented alot of tactics for PS1, and we get to modify those and create new ones for PS2. That will be fun to be a part of.

[Trolltaxi]

I had my maxbuster gold award at azeban, facing an NC maxcrash with 2 fellow pounders and some dedicated engies to keep us repaired (we were at the slope after the first junction in almost full cover). Pls send more maxcrashes!

[Graywolves]

This was a comforting read.