|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Laheon
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
153
   |
Posted - 2012.07.24 12:51:00 -
[1] - Quote
Regis - I have no problem whatsoever killing people in proto gear with my advanced gear. In fact, I have more success using my advanced AR than I do with my proto AR. I don't particularly know why...
Tony - tactics and strategies help a lot. I don't think you're playing the game right. I've spawned a drop uplink, purposefully run up to a tank as an assault to get myself killed, spawn as a forge gunner, then blown up a couple of dominating tanks and dropships. KDR? Pah. I'd happily die a thousand times if my team won. Just let me get my militia gear on.
Frankly, all those complaining about the game in the current stage are just idiots. This game isn't finished yet, and has some way before it gets released. Even after release, CCP will be bringing in new features constantly. It's not like COD or BF, where they leave the mechanics and features alone and just release new maps and weapons, they will be adding new planets, new types of warfare, possibly new game modes, orbital bombardment, etc.
It's not like CCP will abandon this game in the next five years. Unlike COD and BF, there won't be a sequel every year, as DUST will be the only shooter than can be linked with EVE. It's free to play, not pay-to-win, and your parents don't have to spend $60 every year just so you can waste your life in front of a TV, playing the same game on the same maps over and over.
Instead, your parents pay nothing every year (apart from bills), so you can spend (or waste) your time in front of a TV, feeling like you've actually contributed to a fully functioning, persistent universe and actually feel a connection with your clan/corporation, unlike in COD, BF, MOH, CS, etc, where it doesn't particularly matter what you do from one game to the next. Lose horribly one game? Well, that won't matter for the next match.
tl;dr: This game is completely new in concept. Get your head around that, and until you do, stop posting crap on these forums. |
Laheon
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
153
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 13:05:00 -
[2] - Quote
Tony Calif wrote:Actually, strategy and tactics are limited to off the battlefield IMHO.
So, sneaking behind the lines to capture an objective and a CRU for spawn points isn't tactical? How about flanking, is that a tactic? Using a drop uplink to get behind enemy lines, getting into a good position in order to destroy tanks and dropships... I'm sure none of those examples are a tactical advantage. And all are on the battlefield.
Frankly, all your posts amount to the same thing. You don't fully understand the game, or the beta. You do seem to think that this is a game for the trigger happy, those with sharp reflexes and a good gun game. But what's a good gun game if you get flanked? |
Laheon
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
153
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 13:53:00 -
[3] - Quote
Tony Calif wrote:They are strategies. Not tactics. None of them will save you in a gun fight. And they are bad strategies because they don't involve capping or defending letters.
Gun game > tactics in dust.
Is this what everyone wants.
Thanks for telling me I don't get the game too. You are one of the players who thinks killing and KDR is irrelevant I'll bet.
Actually, tactics is small scale. Usually suited to the battlefield. Strategy is large-scale, i.e. countries and continents. That's why C&C, the Total Wars, Civ etc are strategy games, not tactical.
Sadly, you're also wrong throughout the post. I've often engaged someone, run around a corner, run around behind them, and killed them, even if they were on the verge of killing me. I've also seen a teammate in a gunfight with a heavy with an AR, I've flanked (as they were both in cover) and killed the heavy, saving my teammate.
I've seen games won and lost whether point C was held or captured in the first five minutes of the game. If the attackers get point C and both CRU's near there, they've got a very strong position and a tactical advantage, in that they can spawn either side of A or B and easily flank the defenders. If they lose C, they can spawn at a CRU and recap.
I'm honestly surprised that I have to spell this out. I've seen people with good gun games and a good KDR lose because point C was captured very quickly, and I've seen people with a horrible KDR win because they focussed on capping.
And no, I don't think KDR is irrelevant. I think KDR isn't indicative of success, or of contribution to the team. It helps, but someone with a KDR of 20 may not be as helpful to the team as a person with a KDR of 0.1, who capped A, B and C, dropped an uplink, and used nanohives.
For example, if I'm attacking, I get in a dropship and drop an uplink on top of the building at C. I cap C, and try to cap the CRU near there. If I die, I respawn as forge and blow the CRU up. Why? Because the enemy can take it and spawn a LOT closer to C. It's a tactical advantage that we don't need to let them have, especially as we have an uplink AND an objective to spawn at. It's all about tactical advantages. |
Laheon
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
153
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 14:08:00 -
[4] - Quote
Tony Calif wrote:Scale isn't anything to do with strategy or tactics. Go check the actual difference. If you feel the game is tactical then good for you. But it's really not very.
Actually, yes, it is. If it wasn't, all I'd need to do was run forward, have a good gun game, and then I'd win. But, sadly, if I did that, I'd die, from all the people ambushing and sniping me.
The strategy in the skirmish map? Hold the letters. The tactics behind them? Infiltrate, flank, ambush, whatever. Flanking a position is on a much smaller scale than holding the point in the long run, don't you think?
This game is about as tactical as Battlefield, or at least will be. It will also be more strategical, seeing as you will be able to hold territory, defend and launch attacks. |
Laheon
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
153
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 16:13:00 -
[5] - Quote
Templar Two wrote:
CCP has no experience whatsoever in FPS but plenty in RPG so they are doing what they do best but is it right thing for a FPS MMO?
Shouldn't they change this before it's too late as many here say?
You made a few assumptions in your post. Let's list a few of them.
1: All FPS's require good reflexes and aim.
2: All FPS's provide level playing fields, and the only way to differentiate between players is skill.
3: Your opinions are that of a FPS "purist".
Now, let's examine them.
1. Yes, true, to a certain degree. However, there are exceptions (to some degree). For example, TF2. You don't particularly need good reflexes as a heavy fighting a scout, or a sniper at short range.
2. Erm, no. Counterstrike gives you the ability to buy armor. That effectively gives you twice the hp. True, if you don't have decent reflexes and aim, then it won't help much, but on two players of the same ability, the armor will help. Let's apply that to COD too. As you level up, you get better weapons and killstreaks, enabling you to do more damage, more accurately, and in a shorter time frame. I haven't particularly played the new BF's, so I can't comment on them.
3. You can't apply your opinion to a group of people and claim it's their's without backing of said people, or even proving that you are a part of them. It would be like me going up to, say, Christopher Nolan and saying everyone hates his new film. Why? Because I'm applying my opinion to a group of people who can't have their say. It's a simple logical fallacy and your point that CCP must change it to suit the "hardcore fps fans" is simply your opinion, not everyone else's.
Also, CCP does have people with experience working on DUST. They have people who used to work for DICE on the project, so they're not as clueless as you think. Even if they were, they've done a damn good job, haven't they? |
Laheon
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
153
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 16:19:00 -
[6] - Quote
Tony Calif wrote:
Scale is not THE difference. Usually yes, strategies are larger in scale but that is not the difference. I'm glad a few people have carried on with the topic instead of telling me I'm wrong. I was wrong though the game does have tactics, and strategy, just none compared to proper tactical FPS like CS.
Tactical, yes, sure. I'm in the beta for CS:GO and that's definitely very tactical compared to DUST. For example, running down a corridor trying to find the enemy, looking both ways down a corridor before going down it, throwing a flashbang then moving forward is very tactical compared to dropping an uplink so that your teammates can spawn somewhere unexpected and ambush the enemy.
Please, get your head out of your arse. CS isn't tactical compared to DUST or Battlefield, or even COD. At least in COD you have a minimap and you know where the enemy is. CS is very much your classic aim-and-shoot, reflex-dependent shooter. You can't guess where the enemy is and flank them, unlike in COD or DUST. Instead, you run around aimlessly until you find someone then shoot them. |
Laheon
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
153
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 16:38:00 -
[7] - Quote
Tony Calif wrote:LoL, you must get some horrible scores in CS. Read your last sentence and tell me how I can take you seriously. Mini maps REDUCE the amount of tactics as they essentially counter player movement. Hence why games hardcore modes don't have minimaps. I don't suggest removing the map from Dust.
I rather like having my head up my own arse. Means my face can get a tan too.
Yeah, it's true that I get some horrible scores in CS:GO, but then again, I've never really played it that much at once. I think I have around 30-40 hours on it total. Then there are some games when I'm just on fire... I did exaggerate that part around running around aimlessly though :)
I disagree with the point about mini-maps, though, especially (as in DUST and COD) they don't show where the enemy is unless you either a, see them, b, get shot at, or c, a friendly sees them. It encourages team play, and helps speed up the killing process. I've had a few games on CS where I've run around for five minutes, there being only one person on each team left, not knowing where the other is. It discourages slow and boring gameplay.
Which, in turn, promotes tactics. |
Laheon
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
153
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 17:58:00 -
[8] - Quote
@Templar - I'll give you a few examples of OP guns in modern FPS's. CS: AK-47, AWP. The AK is the best AR in the game, so much so that CT's will drop whatever weapon they have to pick one up. It does the most dps, and on the small maps that CS has, DPS matters.
COD: Dual wield P90's. Need I say more? Most maps on COD (MW and MW2 at least) have a few areas where it's CQC. With this, accuracy is basically nullified. Dual wield F90's at CQC... You're dead even before you know they're there.
Don't know too much about KZ or Planetside.
In the end, most FPS's out there give an advantage to those who have been playing longer, whether it's killstreaks, better weapons, etc. The fact that I can take a few bullets wearing a heavily armored and shielded suit, run away, and come back with full shields (Halo anyone?) makes sense lore-wise and gameplay wise.
The fact that in DUST you can kill someone wearing the most expensive infantry gear, while you're wearing free gear, inherently means that you have a tactical advantage. He has to keep restocking his suit with isk, while you don't. You kill him, you level up quicker, and he loses out. There's an inherent disadvantage to wearing the best stuff, which people need to take into account before using it. It's about balancing risk rather than just steamrolling the opponents.
@Tony - I try to camp, but sometimes they just come out of nowhere and headshot me. My proudest moment on CS:GO was headshotting someone with the basic sniper rifle just after I'd been flashbanged. No scoped, fired a shot off more in hope than anything else. But yeah, I still think DUST is a lot more tactical than CS. |
Laheon
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
153
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 20:40:00 -
[9] - Quote
@Tony
Not really. I disagree with the AWP not being overpowered... One shot kills in an infantry game is a bit OP. One that doesn't let you respawn that round, even.
Templar, they're still adding features and balance to the beta. It's not like they're going to keep the game in this state for release. If you're disappointed in the beta, why not go and come back every build, or even for release? I'm sure CCP are working on mechanics and the feel of weapons to appease those who don't like it, but they'll be testing it in house to perfect it. It doesn't merit needing to be pushed through Sony enough for CCP to do so, when they can just as easily test it in house. |
Laheon
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
153
|
Posted - 2012.07.24 22:59:00 -
[10] - Quote
GT8920-26 wrote:
I'd give you 20 likes if I could.
Given the stated release this year, the likelihood of having passed the point of no return is disconcerting. I hope that's not the case the the FPS mechanics get cleaned up.
GT, I just read the thread you made, so I'd just like to say this.
CCP has in-house testing. There are things they don't need us to test, and therefore test it in house. For example, mechanics. However, they can't stress test vehicles, weapons, or the servers.
In order for us to test features, they have to push it through Sony (as we download the game client from Sony servers), so the less they pass to Sony, the less Sony has to check, and the quicker the build goes through.
These points have been made before, as have yours. The conclusion has always been CCP is working on it. |
|
|
Laheon
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
153
|
Posted - 2012.07.26 09:33:00 -
[11] - Quote
Okay... Regis and Mud don't realise that although the game does reward playtime, even in the long run, it's not like you can start out and not kill someone in a proto suit or even be helpful.
Let me make this absolutely clear - I have 7m SP, with approx 1mil being wasted in experiments. That's 6mil SP that I use most of the time. A week or two ago, that was 4mil SP. I was easily killing people in proto suits in a basic assault suit (not militia) with a GEK-38 AR, the merc pack SMG, and militia grenades. The merc pack SMG I've killed people using the proto smg again, I've killed people using the duvolle and creodron AR's with my GEK, and I've killed heavies armed with ARs in my assault suit.
Obviously, I have my fair share of deaths against them. Now, if they have 10-15mil SP, and I've killed them, does that imply that playtime = dominance, having playing approximately half the amount of time as they have? Personal skill plays a massive factor in the gun game. If you can't aim, you're going to have trouble killing someone, even if you do have proto gear.
On balance, I also get killed by people in militia gear. All the different gear is giving you is a small advantage, like in EVE. A meta 2 module will give a small advantage over a meta 1 module, whether it be fitting or stats, but it won't make you "omgwtf" material. |
Laheon
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
153
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 23:15:00 -
[12] - Quote
Evicer, thanks for ressing an old thread. |
|
|
| |
|