Shields Replacing Armor - Good or Bad Change?

[CutterJohn]

Originally Posted by Verruna

Needless to say i don't like the idea of shields in PS - A small buffer shield with armor might be good though. Planetside really needs to retain the teamwork it had with healing and repairing (in some fashion) - quick dropping health/ammo packs seem like a bad direction best kept for games like BF.

Not sure what game you're talking about. Almost every single person had engy certed and carried a glue gun. A large majority also had medic certed and carried a medapp everywhere.

There was very little teamwork when it came to healing, and virtually none when it came to repairs(aside from MAXs).

The fact that you can only regen half of your 'health' means you'll still need healing, and only medics will be able to supply that rather than everyone carrying a heal tool instead of a pistol, means you'll need teamwork even more.

[Zekeen]

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

The thing you're forgetting is the devs have played the game. You haven't. So by default you are coming from an uninformed decision, and its rather arrogant to assume you know whats 'best'.

Here's how pretty much every reveal has gone so far.

Step 1. "They did what? Thats not how it was in PS1 and it cannot work in any other way! "
Step 2. Higby or RadarX comes in and explains their reasoning behind the choice.
Step 3. "Oh, thats pretty reasonable/sensible".


Every. Single. Time. With the exception of driver gunning, that's still rather controversial.

Haven't said anything was "best", I said we should come together as a community to decide what is "best". You might wanna figure out how to quote people before throwing out claims like that. I'm probably wrong on a lot of stuff, but if I am, no harm comes. If I'm wrong, they already have a perfect system in place and no one cares of what I've said here cause it instantly become irrelevant.

And regardless of how right the devs can be, a thousand heads are better than several. If devs were always right when they made or updated a game, we wouldn't need Betas. No one is saying the devs are wrong or anything first of all. Secondly, the devs are small somewhat tight knit group. For all WE know, they may very well have COMPLETELY different tastes in one feature or another from a VAST MAJORITY of players. This is why we talk about things. The "just in case". The dev's will share views with the majority 98% of the time, but with the thousands of features in a game the size of PS2, we gotta look at the big picture. Don't just go "dev's MUST be right" and leave it at that. Look what happened with SWG: NGE. That was ALL dev work there. Thank god the PS dev team is virtually flawless, but why not put our voice in anyways?

You don't like tank gunners, and I don't like flashing shields giving away my position from stray bullets in the dead of night. To each his own - to call that arrogant... is itself true arrogance.

[Fenrys]

Thing is, everybody was an engineer and a medic in PS1, so everybody could regenerate their own life/armor. Now that everyone can't carry a glue gun and med app, what recharging shields give us is a reason for some people to play classes other than Engineer or Medic. Without an automatic refill, I think those 2 classes are the only ones that would get used. As it is, medics will probably be over represented.

It might be OK to remove the shield if everybody could repair and heal themselves. Keep MAX and vehicle repairs for the engies, and rezzing for the medics. I'm not a fan of the class system, and would actually like to see it tossed along with shields, but I voted to keep the shields because of the way the class system is set up.

[ArcIyte]

BFBC2 and BF3 had over-represented Medics because their weapons were the best/competitive with the best weapons in the game. Having less armor and a weaker gun is definitely going to thin their herd in PS2

[CutterJohn]

Yeah, I'm not too worried that everyone is going to be medic. Depends on the tools medics have to heal, as well. If you both have to sit still while they watch a scroll bar.. Maybe more will be medic, since few people will heal others with mechanics like that. If you can toss packs or shoot them once with a big heal/heal over time, i think they'll be a lot more willing to pass the love around.

[Skitrel]

Originally Posted by Verruna

You say that like its perfectly fine for Planetside to be a Battlefield clone.... Battlefield is a awesome game series - Game mechanics in BF might not flawlessly carry over to Planetside.. a completely different game type.

My #1 concern from what i've seen so far is over BFing Planetside, i don't want to play battlefield when i load up PS2, it *might* make for much crappier gameplay. Will have to play beta to see though.

Needless to say i don't like the idea of shields in PS - A small buffer shield with armor might be good though. Planetside really needs to retain the teamwork it had with healing and repairing (in some fashion) - quick dropping health/ammo packs seem like a bad direction best kept for games like BF.

Just because I named Battlefield does not mean I called Planetside a BF clone. Every single FPS out there today utilises recharging health barring Valve titles and there's a reason for that, people like it. It let's people get on with the shooty shooty and spend less time running off to find health and armour. It let's them get on with the shooting bit of the game.

The mechanics we've seen so far allow for more shooty shooty while still promoting that teamwork and demanding mixed unit tactics. Medics and engis will be just as necessary as always because taking damage still needs repairing, it just doesn't put you in a position where you can't still counterfire at least somewhat, despite the lower health.

To imply that Battlefield 3 doesn't promote teamwork is also ludicrous, get on the teamsync servers. The only problem the game has is the lack of voip which effectively splits everyone in the game into 4 man groups, or not even groups if they're pubbers. Hilariously on the none teamsync servers where there's hardly any teamwork going on a single 4 man squad can singlehandedly win games because, as we like to put it, teamwork is OP.

[Shade Millith]

Originally Posted by Skitrel

No. It's not opinion, an opinion is "my preference is non regenerative" a statement of fact is "it makes the game easier", a stupid fact because something that effects absolutely everyone gives absolutely nobody an advantage, or a disadvantage. It makes the game play differently, it does not however give anyone any advantage over anybody else and therefore can't make the game easier.

Point out exactly why and how regenerating health hurts those games that have it, and why those games that do have it would be better without it, explaining what the gameplay effects would be and why those gameplay effects would be better.

Support your statement. The success of the core games that all use it is enough evidence to show that it doesn't hurt those games. Burden of proof is on you.

My OPINION is that it's bad. You want reasons for my opinion? Here's why.

In PS1 getting shot meant time spent doing something other than shooting. You had to actively heal yourself, or otherwise get someone else to do so. Someone on your team had to put aside their gun to do so.

Regenerating health or armor means that less time is spent worrying about health.

This lines up perfectly with instant resurrection. It's all about making the game simpler, and less about tactics and supply lines and more about gun gun gun gun.

Just because EVERYONE has the same means nothing. It's about what is taken from the game as a whole. Instant Resurrection is possible by all, but it still makes death a non issue. It's taken a vast amount of the penalty of death out of the game.

That's my problem with it.

Every single FPS out there today utilises recharging health barring Valve titles and there's a reason for that, people like it. It let's people get on with the shooty shooty and spend less time running off to find health and armour.

And I hate it. The FPS's today are too interested in "EVERYONE HAS TO SHOOT ALL THE TIME MORE DAKA!! IF YOU'RE NOT SHOOTING YOU'RE WRONG!!"

To imply that Battlefield 3 doesn't promote teamwork is also ludicrous

Compared to BF1942, it doesn't.

The original you had to work together to keep everyone alive. And I mean ALIVE alive. If you die, you're dead and have to go back to a held flag. No magic squad spawning. No magic 'Oh, you're dead? Not anymore' shockpaddles.

You spotted an enemy? You'd need to tell others on their location and movement manually. Actually utilize teamwork. None of this easy 'push bootan', everyone and their granny knows a pin point location, and their direction (Hell, you can use the icons to shoot them without actual LOS).

[Sirisian]

Originally Posted by Shade Millith

In PS1 getting shot meant time spent doing something other than shooting. You had to actively heal yourself, or otherwise get someone else to do so. Someone on your team had to put aside their gun to do so.

Regenerating health or armor means that less time is spent worrying about health.

Actually this was explained before. If health is say 4 times larger than the shield then the shield is designed to stop random bullets. A player doesn't feel the need to "retreat" and repair their armor/health after getting hit once or twice.

So it's not regenerating health or armor that makes you more worried about health it's the disproportionate weight toward the shield that causes that. If the shield goes away and the next two bullets kill you then medics will be used to revive, not heal. You want players to be able to step out and take some shots at the enemy. They might get shot once or twice, but those random bullets are negated by the shield. If someone has skill and can sustain fire on a running enemy for instance they take down the shield and do health damage which reflects a permanent weakness that a medic can then heal.

This was one of my previous arguments for long TTKs if the connection isn't clear.

[Skitrel]

Originally Posted by Shade Millith

My OPINION is that it's bad. You want reasons for my opinion? Here's why.

In PS1 getting shot meant time spent doing something other than shooting. You had to actively heal yourself, or otherwise get someone else to do so. Someone on your team had to put aside their gun to do so.

Regenerating health or armor means that less time is spent worrying about health.

This lines up perfectly with instant resurrection. It's all about making the game simpler, and less about tactics and supply lines and more about gun gun gun gun.

Just because EVERYONE has the same means nothing. It's about what is taken from the game as a whole. Instant Resurrection is possible by all, but it still makes death a non issue. It's taken a vast amount of the penalty of death out of the game.

That's my problem with it.




And I hate it. The FPS's today are too interested in "EVERYONE HAS TO SHOOT ALL THE TIME MORE DAKA!! IF YOU'RE NOT SHOOTING YOU'RE WRONG!!"



Compared to BF1942, it doesn't.

The original you had to work together to keep everyone alive. And I mean ALIVE alive. If you die, you're dead and have to go back to a held flag. No magic squad spawning. No magic 'Oh, you're dead? Not anymore' shockpaddles.

You spotted an enemy? You'd need to tell others on their location and movement manually. Actually utilize teamwork. None of this easy 'push bootan', everyone and their granny knows a pin point location, and their direction (Hell, you can use the icons to shoot them without actual LOS).

Wait, you're now attacking instant resurrection in tandem with this stupid argument?

You're aware it's not instant correct? You're aware that squad spawning has a respawn of 45 seconds right? The majority of the time it'll be quicker to spawn on the galaxy than do that.

What it sounds more like, from this and from everything else you say on the forums, is that you're against pretty much everything that brings a game up to date, modernises it, brings it into the next gen.

If you want to play PS1 go and play PS1, everyone else wants to play a new, up to date, modern shooter.

Regenerating health or armor means that less time is spent worrying about health.

Speeding up the game is a good thing, it means less time doing boring shit and more time doing the bits everyone really enjoys, participating in big epic battles, performing gal drops, being part of epic tank columns, and so on. It means less time running off to find someone that can heal you. It means less people all doing those things and instead they're spending their time and popcount as part of the battle as opposed to not doing anything cool or fun at all.

The same mechanics are present, they've just been consolidated into removing what was essentially boring play that removed people from participation. Participation is good and should be maximised as much as possible.

You're acting as if having shields means nobody will die. You're acting as though everyone is going to be a BFR now. You're acting as though shields mean nobody will need a constant supply of health, as though 100s of defenders shooting at an invading force of MAX's won't require maintanence, that the heavy assaults won't require a constant source of healing.

What you're doing is making small, unfocused or incorrect statements.

[Shade Millith]

Originally Posted by Skitrel

Wait, you're now attacking instant resurrection in tandem with this stupid argument?

You're aware it's not instant correct? You're aware that squad spawning has a respawn of 45 seconds right? The majority of the time it'll be quicker to spawn on the galaxy than do that.

I've heard nothing from the Dev's that states a time for how long resurrection takes. Yes, I'm aware that Squad Spawning it supposed to take a small fraction of time. However I still haven't heard that they're preventing it from happening within a Base's area. There is a huge amount of a base outside.

What it sounds more like, from this and from everything else you say on the forums, is that you're against pretty much everything that brings a game up to date, modernises it, brings it into the next gen.

Yes, a modern FPS is simplified so that even the lowest common denominator can play. They take the penalty of dying and turn it into a joke.

I used to be worried about dying in a game. I'm not anymore. That's a bad thing.

The same mechanics are present, they've just been consolidated into removing what was essentially boring play that removed people from participation. Participation is good and should be maximised as much as possible.

I disagree. Removing people from play because of death is a good thing.

What you're doing is making small, unfocused or incorrect statements.

Negative. I'm focused on deriding things that are dumbing the game down to a Battlefield Online.

I'm sorry I like to think a little more in my FPS's.

[Malorn]

Nearly everyone in PS had Engineering because they had to in order to fix their own armor. They could suck down medkits to heal, but they needed a BANK for the armor.

All the shield system does is take away the need for every soldier to have an armor repair tool with them. Do you really want to run around a corner and rep yourself during and after every engagement?

For the Engineers out there, do you really want your job to be Armor-Rep-Bitch for your squads? With so many people taking damage, that's all you would do. I know I would never play engineer if that was the case.

The Shield system is great. It replaces armor and essentially has the same effect as every person having their own armor repair tool. It streamlines the process and allows engineers to focus on combat & repping MAX & vehicles with a fair chance of getting to do some other combat and utility as well.

The old PS system was a good start and neat, but the PS2 system is clearly a step in the right direction to streamline things and make the class system manageable. They could give everyone an armor repair tool instead of shields but that would be tedious and slow down the pacing of the game.

When Smed said they took everything that sucked out of Planetside, this was one of those things. It's a clear improvement.

[Skitrel]

Originally Posted by Shade Millith

I've heard nothing from the Dev's that states a time for how long resurrection takes. Yes, I'm aware that Squad Spawning it supposed to take a small fraction of time. However I still haven't heard that they're preventing it from happening within a Base's area. There is a huge amount of a base outside.

Then you should pay more attention to the various sources. 5 seconds, plus possible cooldown, dependant on balance testing during beta.

Yes, a modern FPS is simplified so that even the lowest common denominator can play. They take the penalty of dying and turn it into a joke.

No, they take the negatives from games an instead focus on positives. What they do is try to increase the number of people playing instead of looking at menu screens. Looking at menu screens is fun for nobody.

I used to be worried about dying in a game. I'm not anymore. That's a bad thing.

Why? Define. Personally death has never ever been an issue, in any game. Besides Project Reality name 1 game where death was something to be avoided, ever, in the history of fps games where death was anything more than a minor annoyance. No game ever really penalised death, they just had mechanics that were older and less polished, forcing a player to make a trek from a crappy spawn because they hadn't advanced to the more polished, more fun mechanics we have today, where people have less boring shit to do before the fun shit. Explain why penalising players by making them do boring shit, is good for the game, so far you have yet to answer my question. You have yet to explain why what you're proposing would be good for the game.

I disagree. Removing people from play because of death is a good thing.

Herp derp, no reasoning.

[Shade Millith]

Originally Posted by Skitrel

Then you should pay more attention to the various sources. 5 seconds, plus possible cooldown, dependant on balance testing during beta.

That is about the best thing I've heard all day.

No, they take the negatives from games an instead focus on positives. What they do is try to increase the number of people playing instead of looking at menu screens. Looking at menu screens is fun for nobody.

Exactly. "Penalizing the player for death isn't FUN. So lets make it easier."

I hate that.

Why? Define.

Having to go back and head back to the fight had two reasons.

1) Dying meant that you had a reason to not die. Otherwise have fun getting back.

2) Dying meant you're out of the fight. BF games respawn you right back into the fight.

Dying should be a penalty. Making it easier and easier to get back means death becomes more and more trivialized.

Herp derp, no reasoning.

I just did.



We obviously like different things.

I like risk, and having to be careful.

You like fast gameplay.

We're not going to agree on this.

[Skitrel]

Do not make assumptions about who I am or what I like without my explicit statements. Do not make assumptions about someone you're talking.

You like fast gameplay.

I play Project Reality daily, the slowest and most penalising game on death and game speed that's out there.

I still disagree with you, explicitly.

[Vash02]

I dont like it becuase I think people flashing white everytime they get shot (or when their shields pop) would be ugly.
Also to the people complaining about the monumental effort of pressing a key and holding down the mouse button. Do you just want to sit there and twiddle your thumbs now?

Also I do remember a tweet from Higby commenting on COD that went something to the likes of "BLOODY SCREEN SO REALISTIC". A recharging shield is a clone of that except without the blood.