Death penalty in PS2

[The Kush]

I liked the timer in planetside 1. If your dying like a b**** you need to sit down in time out and think for a second why your dying so much. Either that or step up and improve your game. All these kids complaining about the death timer must have died a lot haha I never got it.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by The Kush

I liked the timer in planetside 1. If your dying like a b**** you need to sit down in time out and think for a second why your dying so much. Either that or step up and improve your game. All these kids complaining about the death timer must have died a lot haha I never got it.

Maybe you're dying because you're defending a base against overwhelming odds? The timer must be standardized, the enemy is the enemy, not the timer.

[Immigrant]

Originally Posted by Brusi

So you think as a medic you won't be killing people? This is an FPS game... Much more so than the original..

Yes but definitely way less then pure combat classes. Also I don't like healing buffing your stats suggestion since it open a door for exploits. FF + healing buffs = cheap exploit. Rewards if any should be multiplier to xp for staying alive for let's say 30 mins... but still there would have to be penalties for staying alive too short in a row. Simply put dying too often (let's say 20 times in 5 mins) is either reflects severe stupidity or conscious exploiting of game rules (or lack of them) and should be discouraged via penalties.

Originally Posted by CuddlyChud

A death penalty like this just makes it more frustrating, especially when you die due to chance.

I sincerely doubt you'll die 20 times in a row by chance.

Originally Posted by NCLynx

In a game where death is almost more common than anything else, why would you want to penalize it? Sure for everyone kill someone gets that's a death on someones part too but not every death gave a kill.

Those god damn trees... Although that's PS1. Still though, why penalize people for dying when it's one of the two most main aspects of the game. (Kill or be killed) .

Actually it wouldn't be dying itself that is penalized rather the playstyle which can lead you to getting killed 20 times in 5 mins. Please read what I wrote in my opening post prior to replying.

Originally Posted by WorldOfForms

One of PS1's biggest problems was how obscure and unfriendly it was to new players.

That is very easy to solve - give a temporary perk/chip to newcomers which allows for more higher death per time ratio without any penalties during the first hours ingame.

[Immigrant]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

death penalty only discourages aggressive play and encourages camping and/or taking shots from long range and fleeing(guerilla warfare). The enemy is what you should be fighting, not the respawn timer.

Disagreed. Aggressive gameplay is always rewarded via higher xp gain. Anyway timer should be set that way it wouldn't be annoying yet would prevent zerg tactics from being too successful. Death penalty discourages stupid play in first place.

[The Kush]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

Maybe you're dying because you're defending a base against overwhelming odds? The timer must be standardized, the enemy is the enemy, not the timer.

No excuses. The losers lose the winners win.

[Immigrant]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

Maybe you're dying because you're defending a base against overwhelming odds? The timer must be standardized, the enemy is the enemy, not the timer.

You must realize that this works both ways. If you respawn faster/with no penalties so will your attackers, this is a lame excuse. Since usually defenders have the upper hand - access to turrets, and other previously set defenses DP should work almost always in their favor.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by Immigrant

Disagreed. Aggressive gameplay is always rewarded via higher xp gain. Anyway timer should be set that way it wouldn't be annoying yet would prevent zerg tactics from being too successful. Death penalty discourages stupid play in first place.

Yet it is discouraged by an undesirable increase in spawn timer.

Originally Posted by Immigrant

You must realize that this works both ways. If you respawn faster/with no penalties so will your attackers, this is a lame excuse. Since usually defenders have the upper hand - access to turrets, and other previously set defenses DP should work almost always in their favor.

If it's so equal, then it's simply an irritation. Volume of deaths can easily result from playing the objectives instead of playing for KDR. Death penalties are wrong, the wasted resources are the only possible good way of doing this. Punishing based on volume of deaths only punishes players willing to risk themselves to put their bodies on the capture point.

[Pyreal]

Being removed from the action is all the penalty there needs to be.

Also, as to the mechanic to entice a player to wait for a rez, I think a better question is: What is there to entice a Medic to rez someone? Where is the worth to him to risk the danger and time?

[NCLynx]

Originally Posted by Immigrant

Actually it wouldn't be dying itself that is penalized rather the playstyle which can lead you to getting killed 20 times in 5 mins. Please read what I wrote in my opening post prior to replying.

That's what I get for jumping the gun; however, my answer remains the same. For now anyway, this is another one of those questions where I feel we'll be able to more accurately judge in beta.

[ArbitraryDemise]

Let me pre-face this by saying that this game will have many, many arbitrary deaths.

Oh look, a sniper... boom, headshot, dead...
Oh look artillery... boom, bang... dead...
Oh look, being strafed by a mossie that came out of the sun... dead...

You never want to punish people for the random dice roll that deemed that an artillery shell would land on them. The only thing games should punish player's for is bad play.

Yet by the same token, good play is often shown via deaths being incurred by a player. After all there is only one way to push an objective. That method involves getting in there and shooting things that shoot back, and those things that shoot back are often times capable of some modicum of aim. Therefore, if you are playing for the objective you will die.

So, my question is: do you want to punish players for playing for the objectives?

A respawn delay seems so unimaginative to me. I would rather we all use our collective brain-cells to try and come up with a better way of rewarding people for playing for the objectives, while still making life, and the loss of life in this game meaningful.

Therefore, I propose... uh... I'll write this part of the post later.

[laelgon]

To the people who say a death penalty is suitable for "bad" players and encourages people to play better, have you ever considered that some people are never going to be able to play at the same "skill" level as others. I've got a close friend who likes shooters, but due to some medical problems he simply can't react as fast as most people. He dies a lot more because of that, but still enjoys playing them. Please tell me how it's justified that on top of dying more often, he also gets to be penalized for it.

Dying a lot can be frustrating experience already, do you really want to make it more frustrating so that people stop playing?

[Toppopia]

Originally Posted by ArbitraryDemise

Let me pre-face this by saying that this game will have many, many arbitrary deaths.

Oh look, a sniper... boom, headshot, dead...
Oh look artillery... boom, bang... dead...
Oh look, being strafed by a mossie that came out of the sun... dead...

You never want to punish people for the random dice roll that deemed that an artillery shell would land on them. The only thing games should punish player's for is bad play.

Yet by the same token, good play is often shown via deaths being incurred by a player. After all there is only one way to push an objective. That method involves getting in there and shooting things that shoot back, and those things that shoot back are often times capable of some modicum of aim. Therefore, if you are playing for the objective you will die.

So, my question is: do you want to punish players for playing for the objectives?

A respawn delay seems so unimaginative to me. I would rather we all use our collective brain-cells to try and come up with a better way of rewarding people for playing for the objectives, while still making life, and the loss of life in this game meaningful.

Therefore, I propose... uh... I'll write this part of the post later.

I agree with this, because are we meant to be punished for being the good little teammate we are supposed to be by going for the objectives? Or are we meant to stay back and get 1 kill every hour but never die?

I think the only thing we need is that everyone respawns at same time so that it becomes a sort of orderly assault rather than a chaotic 1 man runs in at a time. But some kind of delay would be nice so the defenders can catch a breather and prepare for the next assault.

[Pyreal]

Originally Posted by Toppopia

I think the only thing we need is that everyone respawns at same time so that it becomes a sort of orderly assault rather than a chaotic 1 man runs in at a time. But some kind of delay would be nice so the defenders can catch a breather and prepare for the next assault.

But shouldn't that "orderly assault" be the result of teamwork, rather than a cycling spawn?

And there's always the fact that the first guy to die immediately after the cycle fires has to wait the longest.

[Xyntech]

I agree that taking players out of action is bad enough.

As long as it isn't instant/nearly instant respawn, it doesn't need to get longer.

Let's say the respawn timer is 10 seconds (PS2 being faster paced than PS1). That's 10 seconds that you don't get to play.

If you die once every 10 minutes, that's 1/60th of the time you don't get to play. If you die once every 2 minutes, that's 1/12th of the time you aren't getting to play.

That seems like fair penalization to me. Want to play more of the time? Stop dying so much. That's not even counting whatever time it takes to run back to where the fighting is happening, which is playing, but may not be as fun, especially if it's what you are spending 99% of your time doing.

Increase it to 15 seconds to penalize that same player, and suddenly they are out of the fight 1/8th of the time. What's the point?

Some players will never learn to play better no matter how long the spawn timers get, while others will get better even if the spawn timers are always the same.

This idea that punishing death will encourage players to play better sounds very anecdotal to me.

[Toppopia]

Originally Posted by Pyreal

But shouldn't that "orderly assault" be the result of teamwork, rather than a cycling spawn?

And there's always the fact that the first guy to die immediately after the cycle fires has to wait the longest.

I doubt the majority of people that play this will be here for the teammwork, they will be all the BF3 and COD noobs that don't know the meaning of teammwork and will do their own thing, while the rest of us know what teammwork is so we will be organised, but not everyone will be.