Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Choked up Warfare

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • replied
    You can see how it is difficult to design a team game type that pleases good teams and average teams right thro to noobs. If you create multiple ways back into the game for a losing side, competitive team matches would never be won, it's a fine balance - to few options = lock out, too many= constant turnover... good luck Jim in your balancing act.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by Bersy View Post
    All I am saying is it is realllly easy for one team to get nearly entirely disabled very quickly.
    True, but stacked teams to the point where the game is unplayable happen in every gametype. Teams getting disabled quickly without the game ending in ONS was a problem even in clangames where everybody was organised.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Excellent news.

    Since Epic is in the vicinity, little dots to tell us where the empty vehicles are when you respawn or use nodes to teleport really helps. (as used in ONS plus)

    If there are no choke points, making comebacks is far easier, because locking down one vicinity is easy - two a bit more difficult and 3 nigh impossible.

    As for knowing where and more crucially when to attack - that's 80% of the skill of ONS, and the whole reason why it has such a strong following. It's the balance of strategic awareness and fragging skill that keeps the game on my hard drive.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by Entropy View Post
    Honest Journalist mistake.

    And this is why I said in my post that there should be more official info. There is so much false and inofficial info coming out that makes the game look/sound not as good as it is.


    EDIT:
    @ Bersy. The Ressource imbalance is solved quite easily in ONS by changing the the node locations: THe closer the node to the base, the harder they should be to get for he attackers. And if the distance ratios between the nodes are changed it takes much longer for the attackers to bring their ressources there and less time for the defenders.
    For TDM/1on1 (especially for 1on1) it is much harder to change the rules to make the matches more interesting. (fully stacked Players with health, shield and weapons/ammo control the map and made the matches one sided to a degree that there was A LOT of complaining about).

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    And we all know Epic staff members can only speak truth.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Hell-ooo?

    Originally posted by Entropy View Post
    Honest Journalist mistake.
    Hellooo, guys, Entropy is a designer at Epic. He knows what he's talking about. Obviously the reporter had a slight misunderstanding, so everyone can now stop pulling each other's hair out and go back to watching months-old UT3 preview vids.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by Bersy View Post
    AS.. DM.. CTF.. pretty much every other gametype besides ONS doesn't have this problem in UT2004.

    All I am saying is it is realllly easy for one team to get nearly entirely disabled very quickly. To some degree it's due to its heavy reliance on vehicles and how much your teammates know exactly where they need to be. In AS you're constantly told where you need to go and what the objective is.. you're showed who's carrying an objective.. In DM you could theoretically run around in any direction and win if you're more skilled than the other guy (no need to get into the "map control" thing).. and in CTF there's pretty much only one way to go, but often several different ways to get there. So all these gametypes are more or less streamlined, and I think Warfare needs to have something (ie HUD system) at least to make it as easy to grasp as AS... in ONS the HUD could have been so much more intuitive, as evidenced by the fact that many servers adopted custom mods just to fix it.. usually these ended up being the more popular servers because people had an easier time seeing where enemies were, where available vehicles were... anyway as I said we'll just have to wait and see.. but I'm kind of on the fence as to how much I'll enjoy Warfare over the long term, once I've gotten used to playing with all the toys and such - which I admit, in itself is worth the price of the game.
    correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't WAR described as being ONS and AS at the same time? so theoretically, wouldn't the announcer be telling you what to do, and what objectives need to get done? I could see it where you boot up the game, and your told where you need to go to make the most immediatly dramatic move for your team. Little side things could be pointed out if you chose to or listened to what nthe announcer said, but they would only make ur job easier, and ultimately would be unneccassary for victory, but down-right helpful.

    Now who just understood what I just said? lol

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by Boksha View Post
    That's not one of ONS's weaknesses.
    I honestly can't think up a gametype that wouldn't have this problem.
    AS.. DM.. CTF.. pretty much every other gametype besides ONS doesn't have this problem in UT2004.

    All I am saying is it is realllly easy for one team to get nearly entirely disabled very quickly. To some degree it's due to its heavy reliance on vehicles and how much your teammates know exactly where they need to be. In AS you're constantly told where you need to go and what the objective is.. you're showed who's carrying an objective.. In DM you could theoretically run around in any direction and win if you're more skilled than the other guy (no need to get into the "map control" thing).. and in CTF there's pretty much only one way to go, but often several different ways to get there. So all these gametypes are more or less streamlined, and I think Warfare needs to have something (ie HUD system) at least to make it as easy to grasp as AS... in ONS the HUD could have been so much more intuitive, as evidenced by the fact that many servers adopted custom mods just to fix it.. usually these ended up being the more popular servers because people had an easier time seeing where enemies were, where available vehicles were... anyway as I said we'll just have to wait and see.. but I'm kind of on the fence as to how much I'll enjoy Warfare over the long term, once I've gotten used to playing with all the toys and such - which I admit, in itself is worth the price of the game.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by Entropy View Post
    Honest Journalist mistake.
    /bows head and silently gives thanks.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by Entropy View Post
    Honest Journalist mistake.
    Thanks.

    Of course, we'd still like to know something more about WAR!?

    Please!?

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    I don't think Epic is sitting around testing something that's not fun without fixing it.

    Relax.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by Bersy View Post
    Once people know the game inside out, we're gonna see the same stacking of experienced players on one team immediately cutting off all the opponents resources, leaving them without a prayer of winning about 30-60 seconds into a match. Most likely anyway.
    That's not one of ONS's weaknesses.
    I honestly can't think up a gametype that wouldn't have this problem.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Honest Journalist mistake.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Certainly it wouldn't be the first time that journalists made a honest mistake.

    And we know from the first videos that Torlan had a decent node setup.

    But saying that there is a single conduit to force play into an area is a pretty big statement.

    So I hope that they haven't changed tack.

    If there is a deliberate change to force a single battlefront I can think, of 3 reasons why (in reverse oreder of likelyhood)

    -To be better suited to lower playercounts. (eek if this is true)
    -To make warfare less confusing for new players
    -To allow the mapping of scenery changes from necris to axon as the front line moves.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    I wouldn't be talking about one quote from an article.. Epic has certainly gone into enough depth about Warfare gameplay on more than one occasion, that we can get somewhat of a decent idea of how it will play out.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X