Summary:
Code:
For:
Envenom - Adds to tactical gameplay
Neurotoxin - Gameplay constraints when prone (no AV, short range grenades, 1 second delay from crouching to prone). Wants leaning more than prone.
Stardouser - camping is a legitimate tactic. Deuling one on one isn't the only way to play
Frostedawg - would give up cloaking to go prone as a sniper
MacXXcaM - Similar to Red Orchestra 2
QuantumMechanic - If implemented correctly, could be a good thing. Needs transition times.
Rbstr - Same arguments against it could potentionally be used against crouching. (Make cover as tall as players).
PoisonTaco - Split. Need to test it in beta. Snipers shouldn't be able to prone and keep cloak
LegioX - Worked in WW2OL. Cooldown for prone
SoNaR - Not having prone doesn't remove camping
Hmr85 - Indifferent, not game breaking (implementation?)
Algo - Makes easy targets for snipers
Nick -
Draz -
Toppopia - Just another tactic
maradine - Tactical choice. Trade mobility for increased accuracy and hit profile
SirDart - Harder to spot (smaller profile), steadier shot. Limited uses in CQC. Reduce the vertical look angle.
Vagabond - Doesn't slow down gameplay in BF3.
Rumblepit - restricted by class and locations (outside only)
NEWSKIS -
Haro - Class restrictions. Should be beta tested.
berzerkerking - No different that using crouch as a tactic
Fara - Needs sane collision. (Feet in the wall issues).
KTNApollo - Infiltator only + cert that takes away stealth
Timey - Trade-off, mobility for more accuracy
Crator - Restrictions on its use. Crouch first.
Conq -
Memeotis - For taking cover and trading mobility for accuracy and a smaller profile
Block -
Shade Millith - indifferent
Shotokanguy -
Winfernal - neutral, isn't about camping
Bruttal - indifferent
Alduron - indifferent, Planetside 1 didn't have it
Serotriptomine - no diving prone
Against:
Eyeklops - Infiltrators will abuse it in bases. Requires the maps to be redesigned.
Raymac -
SpcFarlen - Needs an animation delay to make it work. Trade-offs.
Warborn - Encourages camping-style gameplay. Planetside has always been a more aggressive sort of shooter than something like BF3
GreatMazinkaise - Encourages static gameplay
neonlazer - BF3 implementation wouldn't work in PS2. The MCG can't be used while prone
Fuse - Planetside isn't realistic, max prone would be bad. Wants a pro/con list
Bags - Too useful in BF3
Purple - Diving prone wouldn't work in Planetside
Zenben - BF3 and COD are different than Planetside
Mod - Unnecessary
Gandhi -
Mastachief - Never implemented correctly in other games
MrBloodworth - not fun
NCLynx - Scale doesn't allow a correct implementation
Zekeen - Reduces mobility by allowing ambushes when defending (might work)
Gonefshn - Wouldn't break the game if implemented correctly. Valid tactic for snipers. No diving
Razicator - Cloaking snipers with prone would encourage camping
Tigersmith - BF3 allowed snipers to lay down and it was commonly used
elfailo - Encourages camping
Hamma - Wait for beta to see. Unnecessary in a large scale game.
CuddlyChud - Not against it, but defenders don't need help.
KnightHawk ECID - Lean would be better than prone. Cert? Limited turn angle?
The Kush -
Kurtz - Doesn't lead to camping and is useful in certain situations. Made BF3 better.
Kaw - Encourages static gameplay
Zulthus - It's in BF3
Mackenz - Lean would be better.
Greeniegriz -
Dreamcast - Changes the whole gameplay. Too late to put it in
sylphaen - Planetside isn't realistic
Malorn - Encourages camping (smaller target when prone)
dachlatte - Encourages camping
lolroflroflcake - Prone can't work in Planetside because it requires a low TTK. Prone is only useful for camping and without a low TTK it offers to no advantage. (Can't tell if for or against?)
Rare Raisin - Has its uses, but it's unnecessary
Whalenator - Slows down gameplay. Requires new base designs
Saintlycow - Everyone will be lying down.
Death2All - Other games implemented it poorly.
SKYeXile - BF3 has prone
Immigrant -
Xyntech -
Graywolves - Slows down the game. Also no diving prone
Goku -
Vancha - No ground shuffling. 20-30 degree angle of movement. Can move forward and backwards only. Delay animations. (Went on to say it provides no gameplay?)
Pyreal - Encourages camping
Winfernal - Neutral, but it's not really necessary
EVILoHOMER - Encourages camping
Jonny - Encourages camping
2coolforu - Crouched is the same as prone except prone makes your profile smaller. No diving prone. Slows the game down.
DrifterBG - Not necessary
stonelizard -
NewSith - Not necessary
RedKnights - Encourages camping
Slib - Slow transition. No dolphin dives. Limited rotation. Infiltrators only
Blackwolf - Realism. Only light assault and infiltrator can use it (argues that they wouldn't use it if given the ability: light assault can fly and infiltrator is cloaked).
JPalmer - Changes the pace and style of the game
proxy - Needs a solid implementation. Collision when rotating for instance. Doesn't fit into the current game.
Talek Krell - Gives defenders an advantage.
IMMentat - Forces everyone to hide or be killed.
IDukeNukeml -
Sturmhardt -
SniperSteve - Reduces profiles too much.
velleity - Assumes that maxes will prone.
Electrofreak -
basti -
Grimshad - not that type of game
RawketLawnchair -
duomaxwl -
Coreldan - not necessary
TotalBiscuit -
No Opinion:
The Janitor - Says he only uses vehicles and wouldn't use it?
Masahiko -
ShadoViper - Described realism
Stardouser brought this thread to my attention, and I've honestly been indecisive about the subject since it was brought up over a year ago. I gave him some quick tips on how to argue, but I was curious so I read the thread. Before I begin, I want to say the community really hasn't matured since the quick knife thread. The arguments and discussion from most of these posts show very little critical thought into the implementations outside of trivial appeal to fear arguments. There's still the irrational assumptions being made about implementations that the community has a problem getting over with in a discussion.
It seems like the arguments boil down to the implementation and based on that implementation who would be using it and when. On the implementation side we have people saying diving into a prone position hurt the gameplay in other games. Others are advocating for a transition animation from standing/crouching into prone or a delay for controlling how often prone is used. Other limitations include the angle and movement a player can perform while in the prone position and limitations on the classes that can prone.
One of the main arguments brought up against it is creating static gameplay, or otherwise changing the pace of the game, via a poor implementation that can be exploited primarily to camp. This also goes into the argument/assumption that it would only be useful for defenders and snipers.
I think the largest flaw in these arguments is the use of an assumption that a low TTK is being applied with prone. Someone else touched on this briefly. That is camping is frustrating when the TTK is low and retargetting for a lower target in a hallway means it's already too late. (Though crouching could be stated as causing the same thing as others pointed out). Anyway the frustration with camping is mostly a function of the TTK. A low TTK means that in a hallway a camper is a huge threat. For a high TTK an attacker might get shot, but the attacker is in no way at a huge disadvantage. Simply retreating and throwing a grenade (for close range campers) or going for the headshot from a range on the enemy (for ranged campers) is a valid tactic. (The attacker can strafe bullets at a range). All of this also depends greatly on the implementation.
After reviewing the posts and the arguments for an against I have to say that prone if implemented correctly would help the game in ways that crouch can't. Crouching gives a player a slight accuracy bonus and smallest profile by giving up some mobility. Prone would give the best accuracy and smallest profile while giving up almost all mobility. This is also when paired with aiming down sites for both positions.
As an example going prone behind a crate to get a better shot at the enemy in a doorway is a totally legitimate tactic. Some people read that and are immediately disgusted. I feel like the arguments against it want, as one poster said, the whole infantry gameplay to be one on one duels between two players at a time. It's unrealistic and greatly reduces the choices players can make in the game. I'm a huge fan of giving players more choices with how to deal with situations and choosing between crouching and prone is another choice players can make.
Another problem I have with a lot of the posts is the assumption that this will be used all the time. The assumption that any implementation for this must replace crouch. That would be a poor implementation. Ideally most players should be using crouch for most scenarios if prone was implemented correctly. Crator, in his wisdom, hit on one thing I prefer. Having to crouch before one can prone. The concept of a slight delay between the transition was also brought up.
With that said my ideal implementation with the advice of everyone in this thread would be:
Balanced Prone Implementation (Version 1):
- Players must crouch before going prone. Very small transition from crouch into prone. (Must be stationary prior to going prone).
- Collision limits if prone is an available option (including rotating while prone)
- Prone limits vertical aiming
- Prone is restricted to classes. (I don't want to be overly specific, but no MAX prone)
- Movement while prone is slow. Can strafe slowly (for moving out of or into cover). Forward, backwards, and rotation are not limited except by collision.
Interesting thread though. I would really be interested in what the developers have to say about this topic. Personally I voted 'other' on the poll since the yes/no options really didn't capture what I wanted to say.
2012-06-04, 05:35 PM
Linear Mode
