Slow is smooth. Smooth is fast. Fast is life. Now, going too slow is just plan sloppy; you do have an abjective. But once the team work and full mike support kicks in it is going to be about syncing your actions with the man to your left and right. Range walk indeed; not a sprint nor a crawl, but a synced decisive action. 8¦¬8ä¦!

i love when you guy try to be "tactical" you make better targets.
its a game it dont realy work the same.
but if your having fun go for it.

I really enjoyed Operation Flashpoint - both the original Bohemia Interactive version (and its ARMA sequels) and the Codemasters spin-offs Dragon Rising and Red River (the former being one of my all time fave console games). I've always wanted a very large scale war-sim for the console, but there's no mass market appeal apparently.

OFP:DR had possibly the worst controls of any game ever.

Its faster than BF3 and equal to MAG in terms of speed for me

Regis, you're confusing the issue when you say 'slow movements' - what exactly do you think should be done to run/walk speed What do you think should be done specifically to strafe speed? And just so we cover all the movement bases, what about bunny hopping?

Fastest Redline record agaisnt defenders 1.5 minutes. Fastest record of redlining offensive 1 minute.

Well let me try to express the basic premise behind "slow movement = tactical".

If I'm trying to communicate with my team, the moment speed needs to be slow enough that the information given will correlate with the actual in-game situation long enough to be relevant to the people communicating. If movement speeds get too fast, you end up in a situation where by the time the information gets communicated, it's already wrong. If the enemy can run from A to B faster than a person can say "they are headed from A to B" then the game becomes a Halo style arena shooter. If I can't say "there's a tank headed out of their back spawn location on it's way to C" before a tank can make that trek, then what's the point in relating the info in the first place?

The people, such as myself, who WANT a slower pace are hoping for a series of set pieces where there is enough time to report positions and react to them in unison, rather than a game where DOING is quicker than SAYING. We want a pace where moving from position to position has consequence in terms of committed resources. As it stands currently, if the enemy team hacks all three consoles at once, I can already run from A, to B, to C and stop ALL THREE virus uploads before they finish. There's no tactical element there because the speed of movement vs. The size of the engagement area are mismatched for tactical play.

Making movements tactical can yeild very surprising results quickly. Also I cut 50% of the infomration loop out when possible reduces comm lag, for example I dont scream incomming at bravo, I just fly there and tell gunenrs to blow stuff up and report any other movments along the way.

I would suggest you wait until the maps are five square kilometers. If I estimates are right the plateau map is a little more than 1500 meters maybe at most I would say 2000 meters. I personally think speed is okay but it could get a bit faster and be better. In the end this game will be what CCP wants it to be, I think they may have slowed down the movement in order to.try to nail down the hit detection issues but that is just my rather uneducated guess.

My point was actually directed at baal roo. Your response doesn't address anything I said.

I am not for or against an increase in speed. Yes I know that is not really the purpose of this thread.

Tactics can and should be executed at any speed.

BTW tactical communications should take no longer than 3-5 seconds per burst of info.

As a veteran of the U.S. Army and two tours in Iraq I am very well aware of proper combat coms.

Larger maps which is confirmed(sorry my phone doesn't like to post links) will allow for more time to spot, report and engage the enemies regardless of movement speed.

As I said it wouldn't bother me in the least if they increased the speed a little bit I just don't think it should be some huge increase.

Slow movement makes tactics more important. If everyone can run and strafe and bunnyhop like hyperactive jackrabbits, certain tactics become less important and less viable.

You make a reference to real military training. How many times did you learn how to circle-strafe while shooting in basic? That would probably get you killed in real life--that's why people take cover and use tactics to make up their lack of superhuman speed and bullet-soaking capability.

Obviously using speed to your advantage is fine, but the point is that run'n'gun games don't typically emphasize tactics much whereas more realistic games with reasonable movement speed do.

Let me further clarify: I have no problem with scouts moving fast, since they're doing what in EVE would be called "speed-tanking", and their speed is necessary to keep them alive since they don't have much armor or shield. I also have no problem with sprint speed being fairly fast. It lets you get around quickly or have a chance of getting to cover while under fire. What I do have a problem with is circle strafing being a remotely effective technique as it's completely unrealistic and makes me feel like I'm back in the 90s playing Quake 3.

Cover should be necessary to keep you alive, not the ability to strafe faster than someone can aim. Maybe once they add mouse support this won't be an issue as any moderately skilled person will be able to aim faster than all but scouts can strafe.

I'll be honest that you sometimes get on my nerves, but you have a point. While quite a few people have issues with fast strafing speeds, it can't really be argued that the difference between the last two builds has really changed anything from a tactical standpoint. It basically just comes down to the feel of the gameplay.

For instance, I happen to enjoy a few matches of Halo every now and then. However, my enjoyment of such is somewhat curtailed by the circle-strafing and bunny-hopping mentioned in some posts of this thread. I mean, the fact that there is a Bumper-Jumper control scheme specifically to allow you to aim while bunny-hopping just grates on my nerves. That's part of why I like how jumping in Dust is tied to your stamina, and that you can't jump without sufficient stamina.

Most shooters out there have different elements that make them unique, and I play quite a few of them and enjoy those elements in each one. Its just that...when it comes to Dust, I think about the kind of tactics that are commonly used in Halo, and when I think about them in connection with this game, I find it hard to take that picture seriously. I think this game has a different tone, and the current state of gameplay fits that tone better. That is, of course, my opinion.

I do recall stating that such was my opinion, and not something you should have to agree with.

Yeah, immersion is a big part of it. I want to DUST battles to feel like real futuristic military battles might feel. Circle-strafing and bunny-hopping and all that nonsense kill that feel.

Yeah, screw realism! It's sci-fi--that means anything goes!

Let's have space-unicorns and have fire-breathing powers and dragon mounts! I want my gun to shoot big pink flaming marshmallows! Let's have talking animals too! Oh, and dinosaurs with lasers! Dinosaurs are neat!

Just because it's in the future and has more advanced technology means all rules for anything making sense go straight out the window, amirite?

Gameplay>Realism that being said something do need to feel real or at least believable. So simply running in circles in the middle of open ground, at least when there is a tank on the field, should be considered at the least a risky decision.

Realism up to a certain point is necessary or we might as go play the original Doom where don't even really have to aim.

Things like a weapons effective range and kick need to feel somewhat believable not entirely real because mostly these guns shoot hot plasma or other things that we don't have today.

Odd questions (hypothetical)

You obv want the speed of the game to be speeded up even more, so if the devs said ther would be no change would you quit?

Also just say the devs do say no change to standard moving speed but allow nanofibres to be added to dropsuit with the downfall that you lose armor for more speed would you be happy with that?

I agree. Please move tactically so I can tactfully place a remote explosive under you.
Thanks in advance!

PS you are right. There is nothing like a Drill Instructor screaming at you to move with purpose. Honestly, I enjoyed basic so much, I almost wanted to aplly for the Instructor position.

So basically you want the entire game speed changed or you will walk away?

But yet a reasonable alternative your still iffy on?

Put it this way if the game did get speeded up even tho im happy with it now i wouldnt walk away because it doesnt suit me, i would HTFU and adapt and die so to speak because i have no other FPS alternative to play and i like where DUST could be heading

What you say is 100% true, Regis. I think the issue is high strafe speed allows peeps to use and open field as cover. Lord know I'm a half-assed fps'er but more than once last build I waded into a mob 3-4 guys with my smg and came out alive. It's even happened a few times this build. That seems a little bit goofy, imo.