A few things that Matt Higby needs to realize - Page 11

Bags · 2012-05-30, 01:08 AM

Originally Posted by kadrin

Potentially opening another can of worms, but is anyone else concerned about ammo boxes?

I personally think it's just a cop out, giving players infinite ammo. In no FPS I've played where ammo is so easily acquired do I ever run out. That was always a great feature in PS1, actually having to think about how much I'm shooting and if I'll have enough to defend myself while I go back for more, or attempt to scavenge some (which got hard later when backpacks despawned more quickly or even instantly in large combats).

I rarely if ever ran out of ammo in PS1. Only times I came close were gen holds, but even then it rarely happened. I don't seen them was necessary, really.

Jinxsey · 2012-05-30, 01:12 AM

Ditto, even when running a dual Cycler MAX during a CC last stand I rarely fired more than 600-800 rounds. Times when I did, I died long before I could have ever thought about reloading.

Nick · 2012-05-30, 01:15 AM

Originally Posted by Cosmical

all valid points, but weve had this discussion a hundred times before. Yes we all have those first few FPS games that defined the experience for us, some of us were even lucky enough for it to be the original planetside.

Ide say the main thing that has changed the face of shooters, is faster connections and player skill. Back in the day, games gave you huge health bars to keep the fun levels up while you were lagging and jumping around like a spaz. Whereas nowadays connections are too fast and players too skilled for old jumping about shooters to seem compelling. Take Tribes Ascend, nothing about that game is interesting to me because i have had gritty hunkered down combat pushed onto me by Battlefield 3, and i wouldnt want anything else now, because it works.

My main issue is that vehicles seem too easily destroyed, knowing what we do that they cost resources to. Im thinking how anoying it will be to spend your last bit of cash on a vehicle, only to have it blown in a few seconds by an oncoming force. But, this will be sorted in beta testing. I guess more expensive vehicles, and more armour. Limiting the Battlefield.

Players are too skilled to play games like Quake and Tribes Ascend?

You realize those games have much higher skill caps than Battlefield/Call of Duty, yes? Not to mention, 90% of people suck at BF/CoD. Not sure how, an infant could find success playing them.

kadrin · 2012-05-30, 01:21 AM

Originally Posted by Bags

I rarely if ever ran out of ammo in PS1. Only times I came close were gen holds, but even then it rarely happened. I don't seen them was necessary, really.

Originally Posted by Jinxsey

Ditto, even when running a dual Cycler MAX during a CC last stand I rarely fired more than 600-800 rounds. Times when I did, I died long before I could have ever thought about reloading.

No offense to either of you, but it sounds like the vast majority of the time all you did was zerg if you never were concerned about ammo. I'm not saying either of you did that, just what it sounds like.

There were plenty of nights where I would go hours without a single death, add a vehicle into the mix and I could go most, if not all, of the night without one. Needless to say, ammo becomes an issue at that point.

cellinaire · 2012-05-30, 01:23 AM

Originally Posted by Figment

Regarding map size, is 8x8 too small?

So we got 64 square mile of map, or continent spanning from north to south? Let's assume the measurements are taken for the extremities. With the irregular shape of the beach, some of that terrain cannoy be fought on. So let's assume 95% as a generous number.

The grids cover around 90% of that terrain.

So how much of the terrain will actually be fought over? Let's start with the "T"-split that a lot of people imagine right now. That would approximately be 40% of the map. Let's assume there's at all times two or three behind the lines fights going, so another 15%-20%. I'd say 60-75% of the map would be used.

Let's say the terrain itself has a lot of places you can't functionally use, so another 80%.

We then got 0.95*0.9*0.75*0.8*64 ~33 square miles that would be used. Divided by 2000 people, that's about 16 square meters per player on average? Hmm doesn't sound quite right yet.

Alright, so let's assume there's a battlefield area in between two teams of players of around 40% of the remainder. Then we got 6,5 square meters per player in a fight.

Alright so let's assume some people are using the same battle space vertically (building/airborne) and by being in vehicles, that should increase the spacing a bit again. So let's just give a factor 3, maybe 4. Around 20 square meters per player assuming they're not condensed more?

Yeah it might get a bit crowded in a fire fight here and there, it should be enough, but I wouldn't mind seeing some bigger maps.

Mostly to create more travel time and allow for more covert movement, tbh.

Cyssor...? (+ Searhus. my fav continents

)

Bags · 2012-05-30, 01:25 AM

Originally Posted by kadrin

No offense to either of you, but it sounds like the vast majority of the time all you did was zerg if you never were concerned about ammo. I'm not saying either of you did that, just what it sounds like.

There were plenty of nights where I would go hours without a single death, add a vehicle into the mix and I could go most, if not all, of the night without one. Needless to say, ammo becomes an issue at that point.

I did rapid response for a year with some small VS outfit. Usually ended up with K/Ds between 2/1 and 5/1 while on foot.

When I played TR with friends all we would do was go to VS/NC continents with 50% xp bonus and run a TOD, never ran out of ammo there either with massively positive K/Ds.

Zerging really has nothing to do with it, it just sounds like you never went to an equipment terminal for some strange reason.

PS: I ran the standard HA/2 Decis + 3/4 boxes of ammo + 3 medkits + Bank + medapp + hack tool that most people did while in rexo. In agile I ran HA + Deci + 2 boxes of ammo + medkits because my friends always handled the hacking/EMPing 90% of the time. Though they never had ammo issues either.

Graywolves · 2012-05-30, 01:28 AM

Originally Posted by kadrin

No offense to either of you, but it sounds like the vast majority of the time all you did was zerg if you never were concerned about ammo. I'm not saying either of you did that, just what it sounds like.

There were plenty of nights where I would go hours without a single death, add a vehicle into the mix and I could go most, if not all, of the night without one. Needless to say, ammo becomes an issue at that point.

I rarely ran out of ammo as well.

Once or twice if I was foot grunting while repelling a base assualt.

Every vehicle generally needed resupplies.

And Gen/CC Holds.

Bags · 2012-05-30, 01:29 AM

Anyways if an ammo box goes in I hope it goes to the HA or engineer, doesn't make much sense on the light assault.

Graywolves · 2012-05-30, 01:31 AM

Originally Posted by Bags

Anyways if an ammo box goes in I hope it goes to the HA or engineer, doesn't make much sense on the light assault.

Likewise, it seems a little silly. Giving the infantry class that will reach places most people won't be able to the ability to resupply himself and others from such locations.

Bags · 2012-05-30, 01:35 AM

Exactly my thoughts. Light assault is all about mobility and confusion (smoke grenades), so I don't see how resupplying friendlies fits that at all.

It'd be like if the soldier and demoman in TF2 had the ability to resupply themselves.

CutterJohn · 2012-05-30, 01:35 AM

Do we know the ammo boxes are infinite? Disregarding that, was anyone concerned that Lodestars gave infinite ammo to vehicles? Or that sunderers will do so in PS2? Same thing.

I'd completely agree it doesn't fit the LA class though. Its definitely an engineer role. Nobody would bat an eye if it was an engineer laying down an ACE for an ammo terminal.

Bags · 2012-05-30, 01:37 AM

I think it's because it's a lot easier to deploy an ammo box than a Sunderer / lodestar would be.

Coreldan · 2012-05-30, 01:39 AM

I also think it's a bit weird on the LA. Like.. on HA I would perhaps understand it, but it sorta makes it seem to self sufficient.

I hope theres a chance to effect that still on beta.

Bags · 2012-05-30, 01:39 AM

Higby said they were considering putting it on HA when I tweeted him about it a month or two ago.

SKYeXile · 2012-05-30, 01:42 AM

yea i thought it would have been the engi that gets the ammo box...imo it should be a deployable, that needs an ACE or something to deploy though.